Difference between revisions of "Commons Steering Committee Workspace"

From Earth Science Information Partners (ESIP)
Line 32: Line 32:
 
*Wiki - ESIP Community Workspace, Prior Knowledge Useful as Wiki Difficult to Navigate, Business of the ESIP Federation, Primarily Internal Facing, self moderation, constantly changing
 
*Wiki - ESIP Community Workspace, Prior Knowledge Useful as Wiki Difficult to Navigate, Business of the ESIP Federation, Primarily Internal Facing, self moderation, constantly changing
 
*Commons - Curated Content, Knowledge Capture, Internal & External Facing, Content Available in Perpetuity, Light-touch management and moderation
 
*Commons - Curated Content, Knowledge Capture, Internal & External Facing, Content Available in Perpetuity, Light-touch management and moderation
 +
 +
 +
=== Attributes ===
 +
*capturing quality information
 +
*lightweight publication review (aka sniff test)
 +
*reputation growth (individual & organizational)
 +
*persistent content (curation through time provides documentation and evidence of growth and change)
 +
*documents work of ESIP, including meetings
 +
*citable (DOIs are easy to link to- sustainable mostly)
 +
*discoverability (e.g. thru tagging)
 +
*browsability
 +
*forum for ongoing comments & discussion around content
  
 
== Curation Model ==
 
== Curation Model ==

Revision as of 11:30, September 21, 2012

Mission

First Draft

The ESIP Commons is a curated, open, knowledge capture repository for documenting contributions to or arising out of the ESIP Federation. The ESIP Commons creates citable content to recognize individual and organizational contributions to the community. The ESIP Commons provides the larger Earth science informatics community with browsable, discoverable and reusasble resources to move forward faster and more effectively than they could have along.

Current Draft

The ESIP Commons is a curated, open access knowledge repository for publishing contributions to or arising out of the ESIP Federation. The ESIP Commons is a publication platform:

  • for citable content to recognize individual and organizational contributions to the community and
  • for accelerating the discovery and use of knowledge by the global Earth science informatics community.

Vision

Draft Vision Statement

The ESIP Commons realizes the full wealth of expertise and knowledge housed within the ESIP Community in order to move the entire Earth science data and informatics forward toward better science?

The ESIP Commons redefines the boundaries of publishing to capture community knowledge to advance Earth science informatics.


The Earth Science Informatics will help to develop and shape the new field of Earth Science Informatics. It is intended to provide a dissemination platform for research using systems-based approaches to solve multi-scale Earth science problems by encouraging the development …..


YouTube Community Guidelines


Original Requirements for ESIP Commons

Differentiation between Web Site, Wiki, and Commons

  • Website - 'Brochure'/Marketing/Organizational Site, Assumes no prior knowledge, Primarily External Facing, Portal (?)/ linking element, to other web presences, Heavily Moderated/Managed content, more static
  • Wiki - ESIP Community Workspace, Prior Knowledge Useful as Wiki Difficult to Navigate, Business of the ESIP Federation, Primarily Internal Facing, self moderation, constantly changing
  • Commons - Curated Content, Knowledge Capture, Internal & External Facing, Content Available in Perpetuity, Light-touch management and moderation


Attributes

  • capturing quality information
  • lightweight publication review (aka sniff test)
  • reputation growth (individual & organizational)
  • persistent content (curation through time provides documentation and evidence of growth and change)
  • documents work of ESIP, including meetings
  • citable (DOIs are easy to link to- sustainable mostly)
  • discoverability (e.g. thru tagging)
  • browsability
  • forum for ongoing comments & discussion around content

Curation Model

  • Content Types linked to curators
  • Tags for faceted aggregation of content


Licensing Options and Assignment of License to ESIP

Role of Steering Committee

  • Managing Editor(s)

Miscellaneous Discussion Items

  • Levels of curation
  • Who Contributed? (community, individual)
  • Comment-Ability (is it set always?) and community accountability through flags as opposed to moderators- (is that too wiki-like?)

Resources

Gray Literature

PLOS One License

PLOS One Submission Instructtions

Wikipedia Community Portal

Wikipedia Policies & Guidelines
Wikipedia Editorial Administration & Oversight
Wikipedia Handling Disputes
Wikipedia Editorial Quality Review

Wikimedia Commons Community Portal

Wikimedia Commons Project Scope

Flickr Community Guidelines

Encyclopedia of Earth Guidelines

Anticipated Budget

Minutes

Minutes from Commons Governance Telecon for Friday August 24; 2-3:15 pm EST Attendees: Erin, Karl, Rahul, Carol, Reid Continued conversation about the straw man draft of the vision statement viewing resources for developing policies and level and design of management Carol: evolution of commons reflected from the initial to current to future Erin and Carol youTube channel idea-name-commons may not reflect the mission entirely Karl- ways to aggregate using content types

Commons: is a gathering spot- not to call it something different, but for purpose of understanding vision

Rahul- likes the iCommons original

channel: filtered content subscribe to channels

Curation: long term access evaluation and classification weaker association but needs to be highlighted

Mission diving in: curated and open contributions to and arising out of - individual contribute to group product: products of federation activities who contributes: members/ is there a prerequisite? Scope- community guidelines for contribution Term for contributors; community more encompassing concept Member affiliated and non-member affiliated contributions broadly available for community Carol- how do you manage those contributions Flagging system- capture that on-going feedback Post publication peer review process: how that relates to a flagging system Binary thing Caution with community- rivalry Policies deal with this Mission stays broad to allow for growth (Erin) More moderation the more open… YouTube a good example of moderation experiences- complaints about the comments; active moderation- moderated out Karl- anchor terms guidelines to help us define. Rahul- Open as open publish or open to members- Notion of publications needs to be in there. Grey lit? - is it negative Not-formally published but Karl- redefining publication Open-Access (say explicitly) Publication- Is it publishing- publication platform - Evolving? Like Publication Platform Content- back to ESIP mission

Erin: Community Guidance and Guidelines- the place where this gets specific Karl- items that would go in to the commons that aren't Earth science Curation is- filtration Context up front- Carol- Mission will not be stand alone- other web presence Hooks from the mission into the vision- logical flow Linking the functional sectors of observation, research, Karl: accelerates the discovery and use of that knowledge by the broader Earth Science informatics community Carol- run-on tends to lose people Karl- Emphasis on recognition Carol- colon and bullet the two thoughts

from Rahul Ramachanadran to Everyone: The Earth Science Informatics will help to develop and shape the new field of Earth Science Informatics. It is intended to provide a dissemination platform for research using systems-based approaches to solve multi-scale Earth science problems by encouraging the development ….. dissemination or publication platform Carol- publication is more concrete more action acceleration Community contributions bracketed- should brackets be removed community redundant develop and shape- for vision publishing transformation in vision Moving onto vision peer - reviewed in an open-access platform realizing the wealth of expertise - shape and develop Vision is …something out there- what you are going to work toward The ESIP Commons redefines the boundaries of publishing to document the dynamic… content is living-Erin Karl- dichotomy of evolving knowledge and establishment of a public platform that defines pieces of knowledge that remain static…. conversation around the content is dynamic- another facet anyone can archive papers this is broader through linkage evolving perspective about that institutional memory/ community memory capture - other words for memory Talk about vision next week Meeting scheduled for 2:30pm EST In the meantime look at Wiki and edit/ add ideas as thoughts occur --Reidboehm (talk) 13:49, 24 August 2012 (MDT)


Minutes from meeting August 17, 2012 Governance issues and the management of the commons: Visions: link to original concept by Rahul- subset of the directions that the original concept is current- going towards a subset of what we discussed at the summer meeting Role of the wiki-complementary commons and initial web site venn-diagram of the intersection curation model - key idea of curation licensing- everyone on the same page what licenses are most needed rights that are most need with respect to access

What is the role of the steering committee or other management- "managing editor"- handling disputes/ questions? Look at PlosOne license adoption as exemplar Wikipedia document proxesses and wikipedia commons Fickr- guidelines and policies resources: financial needs for support or maintenance: time to think about funding point of departure: thinking about the vision and the curation model differentiation- also can gain from looking at the other sites functionality- web assests that are part of an overall presence area of overlap- workflows, contents, how can we cross reference or link between them commonality/ look and feel: coherent brand capturing differences and similarities web site proper has been online brochure: external facing- no prior knowledge wiki- active collaboration- about or within activity areas work with each other- even though remote approachability is challenge: where to find the granularity of information Chris: Tangent Points- link not a lot of overlap -different types of links into the commons- drill down Conceptual differences- contents will be where? Who the audience of the Commons is: hybrid: external component also way for self documentation external component may be more dominant in determining sort of polish audience may not have as much familiarity with the inter workings professionalism in the products strengthens reputations beyond the community

Creating: style guide: what should be included work flow- lower the barriers without going too low that quality ESIP community generated content- community contributions- do we review those? self curation with products criteria for poster; (Flickr community guidelines) working definitions for these three entities: create a table catalogue with content types- style guides standards Creating a document with all these principles- available in perpetuity

Defining: wiki- ephemera commons current snapshot looking at the encyclopedia of Earth http://www.eoearth.org/ capturing quality information with user feedback: opportunity within the commons lightweight publication workflow helps define use for application purposes- pushes discussion among the community

Planning Erin and Carol: Strawman vision for editing Capturing Commons to inform: reputation: individual and organizational demonstration of productivity- concrete ability to show other program managers discoverability and browse ability (judicious use of tagging and other schemes- aggregate lists of contents) models- resources- refer to those in next conversation - reconvene and discuss the draft via Erin and Carol

Call next Friday 2pm EST webex --Reidboehm (talk) 14:17, 20 August 2012 (MDT)