Difference between revisions of "Winter 2013 Meeting session"
Anne Wilson (talk | contribs) |
Anne Wilson (talk | contribs) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
* [http://commons.esipfed.org/node/695 Session announcement, Sarah's notes from the session] | * [http://commons.esipfed.org/node/695 Session announcement, Sarah's notes from the session] | ||
| − | '''Summary | + | '''Summary''' |
| − | We agreed to continue to pursue the idea. We'll be a group that remains under the Data Stewardship Committee for now, but we'll have separate telecons and report back to the Stewardship telecon. We | + | We agreed to continue to pursue the idea. We'll be a group that remains under the Data Stewardship Committee for now, but we'll have separate telecons and report back to the Stewardship telecon. We also have this place in the ESIP wiki. An email list has been established, see the [[Data Decadal Survey]] main page for details. |
We agreed to study the question for the upcoming year, with the goal of creating a set of possible options for what the project would actually mean. Further, we will invite agency representatives to a panel discussion at the ESIP 2014 Winter Meeting to discuss those options. The ultimate goal might be a white paper that identifies a clear set of a goals and a plan. We will use the ESIP summer meeting as a check point. | We agreed to study the question for the upcoming year, with the goal of creating a set of possible options for what the project would actually mean. Further, we will invite agency representatives to a panel discussion at the ESIP 2014 Winter Meeting to discuss those options. The ultimate goal might be a white paper that identifies a clear set of a goals and a plan. We will use the ESIP summer meeting as a check point. | ||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
What scope should be targeted? Earth Science only, or beyond? Perhaps an Earth Science subpanel plus subpanels from other domains that then contribute to a final report? Maximizing transformational impact seems to call for as broad a scope as possible, but that becomes very effortful and costly. | What scope should be targeted? Earth Science only, or beyond? Perhaps an Earth Science subpanel plus subpanels from other domains that then contribute to a final report? Maximizing transformational impact seems to call for as broad a scope as possible, but that becomes very effortful and costly. | ||
| − | It seems important to | + | It seems important to understand finding from studies that have already been done, so we will do a literature review. See [http://wiki.esipfed.org/index.php/References_to_literature,_sent_by_01/10/13_meeting_session_participants References to literature, sent by 01/10/13 meeting session participants] for some items for a reading list. |
| + | |||
| + | ==Path for Moving Forward== | ||
| + | *Establish monthly telecon | ||
| + | *Make plan for doing a literature review, with milestones for the July meeting | ||
| + | **Create a reading list, assign readers | ||
| + | *Start brainstorming options, capture ideas | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | --[[User:Anne Wilson|Anne Wilson]] ([[User talk:Anne Wilson|talk]]) 10:50, 20 January 2013 (MST) | ||
Latest revision as of 10:50, January 20, 2013
Summary
We agreed to continue to pursue the idea. We'll be a group that remains under the Data Stewardship Committee for now, but we'll have separate telecons and report back to the Stewardship telecon. We also have this place in the ESIP wiki. An email list has been established, see the Data Decadal Survey main page for details.
We agreed to study the question for the upcoming year, with the goal of creating a set of possible options for what the project would actually mean. Further, we will invite agency representatives to a panel discussion at the ESIP 2014 Winter Meeting to discuss those options. The ultimate goal might be a white paper that identifies a clear set of a goals and a plan. We will use the ESIP summer meeting as a check point.
What scope should be targeted? Earth Science only, or beyond? Perhaps an Earth Science subpanel plus subpanels from other domains that then contribute to a final report? Maximizing transformational impact seems to call for as broad a scope as possible, but that becomes very effortful and costly.
It seems important to understand finding from studies that have already been done, so we will do a literature review. See References to literature, sent by 01/10/13 meeting session participants for some items for a reading list.
Path for Moving Forward
- Establish monthly telecon
- Make plan for doing a literature review, with milestones for the July meeting
- Create a reading list, assign readers
- Start brainstorming options, capture ideas
--Anne Wilson (talk) 10:50, 20 January 2013 (MST)
