Interagency Data Stewardship/LifeCycle/Preservation Forum/TeleconNotes/20091110
Agenda
- EP-TOMS plans (John Moses)
- Preparations for AGU town hall (Mark Parsons)
- Draft ESIP statement on data (Ruth)
- Planning for winter ESIP meeting (Ruth)
- Others?
Attending
- Ruth Duerr
- Brian Rogan
- Curt Tilmes
- Irina Gerasimov
- Gao Chen
- Carol Meyer
- John Moses
- Rob Raskin
- Chris Lenhardt
- Mark Parsons
- Bob Downs
- John Scialdone
Summary
• ===EP-TOMS plans (John Moses)===
John Moses discussed EP-TOMS which finished in 2006. The Goddard DIS has the data. The data is still held by the PI Richard Peters and we are trying to get the data into information packets. The PI role is done but he has ideas on long term preservation. We would like to consult with the Cluster on what to do with the data.
Need to look at the trade studies and see how the data should be linked together. He would like to be able to post to the cluster and get feedback and advice as the project moves forward. What type of organization should it have?
Ruth suggested that any material should be added to the Preservation Wiki pages.
He is working with Martha to create a broader DIS data plan and this would be a template for that project. It is all part of a long-term NASA data preservation goal. They will continue to serve data to the community and any plan needs to be compatible with that. As instruments come to an end, they want to be able to work with the investigator to get the data archived. The question was asked if he was looking for consensus. He didn’t feel that he would expect given the different types of instruments.
He will be put on the agenda for the next telecon after he posts materials on the Wiki.
• ===Preparations for AGU town hall (Mark Parsons)===
The townhall is Thursday from 7:30 to 8:30. The concept is Peer Review Data Publication. Bernard Minster would introduce the position statement and Bob and Ruth would discuss the Cluster’s activity. We want to be able to present the issues but have it available for public discussion. What other issues need to come forward? It is a formidable agenda for one hour. Talks should be kept to a minimum but have more of the time for conversations. Citation and Peer Review are the most important topics. The work of the cluster with identifiers is also important. Rob raised the point of having a chart to show the identifiers. It is important that we have a way to show the different identifiers and how they are useful. A desired outcome would be to get journals to become more rigorous in their review of the data sources. Citation is too strong a word. Peer review of data is very difficult to get. Maybe an acknowledgement of the source of the data would be a help if AGU could require this step. It is important that AGU sees the message from this townhall meeting. We need to be sure we have enough notetakers to capture the meeting effectively. Possibly prepare some questions in advance. The next step is to discuss the fundamental issues of the community. Introduce the concept of visual identifiers. We need to provide enough background information so that the audience can effectively be part of the discussion. Because it is a new topic, it is expected that it will raise a lot of questions. Introduce the concepts and then have the questions for the participants. Be sure that they are very fundamental questions. -Appropriateness of citing data -Peer review of data -Issue of recognition – how should the effort of creating good datasets be recognized. There will be a follow up with Bernard to see what he thinks and to bring him up to speed. Outreach There will be a concerted effort to get the word out about the sessions. It is a hope to at least get the informatics people to the session. Carol volunteered staff help in coordinating the publisizing of the session. There is also an informal informatics session at which to announce the session. What are the logistics of capturing the conversation? AGU does not do capture of townhalls yet. They fall below the level of sessions. It is important to have a coordinated effort to capture the meeting with good notetaking and a potential to develop an article for EOS. If we need AV support we would have to pay for it. Mark and Ruth will work out what they will present. This will include the fundamental questions.. Carol will print up the fliers and Mark will get them distributed hopefully in time for the informatics informal get together.
• ===Draft ESIP statement on data (Ruth)===
Whereas, data and data dissemination are central to the mission of the ESIP Federation, we adopt the following data policy. For Type I & II members, data shall be free and openly available except where prohibited by law or legal agreement. For Type III members, ...non-discriminatory basis. Ruth presented the draft ESIP statement on data created at the ESDWG meeting. The group that developed the statement felt that it was appropriate for the policy to follow the types. Ruth asked for comments. NSIDC is both types, for example. There will always be issues around privacy concerns, etc. so a blanket policy is very difficult. It is better to keep it simple rather than too complex since it is difficult to meet the needs of all of the Types. There is also a need to address metadata. It was felt that it would be better to distribute this by email and to solicit responses. • Planning for winter ESIP meeting (Ruth) The cluster has about half a day of sessions that will be ready to go. Chris Grier is coming and the NOAA session needs to be on the first afternoon. A panel of those people are very important. John had to leave the telecon early so there couldn’t be an update. There will be a face to face version of the cluster and the third session would be on the role of data stewardship and decision making. Ruth would send around some thoughts on email to solicit feedback.
Meeting adjourned at 1:56 PM
