Difference between revisions of "Interagency Data Stewardship/LifeCycle/Preservation Forum/TeleconNotes/2017-04-17meetingnotes"

From Earth Science Information Partners (ESIP)
Line 35: Line 35:
 
::* Only real potential downside: The more formal Working Group status will commit the participants to a specific (two year) time frame for project completion
 
::* Only real potential downside: The more formal Working Group status will commit the participants to a specific (two year) time frame for project completion
 
:* '''Bruce''': Budgets for WGs go through their parent committees
 
:* '''Bruce''': Budgets for WGs go through their parent committees
:* Some funding discussion ensued; Nancy described some previous/current DMT activities
+
:* Some funding discussion ensued; '''Nancy''' described some previous/current DMT activities
:* Sophie: We really have two project needs: (1) Technical maintenance/development of the Clearinghouse Drupal infrastructure, and (2) development of new training content for the Clearinghouse
+
:* '''Sophie''': We really have two project needs: (1) Technical maintenance/development of the Clearinghouse Drupal infrastructure, and (2) development of new training content for the Clearinghouse
 
::* The WG status might help provide a pipeline for funding of (1), while (2) will be a more involved, ongoing task
 
::* The WG status might help provide a pipeline for funding of (1), while (2) will be a more involved, ongoing task
 
* Vote on proposal
 
* Vote on proposal
:* Matt solicited any objections to the proposal; none were heard
+
:* '''Matt''' solicited any objections to the proposal; none were heard
:* Nancy moved to make the DMT Working Group a formal Working Group of the DS Committee in accordance with the statement of work document
+
:* '''Nancy''' moved to make the DMT Working Group a formal Working Group of the DS Committee in accordance with the statement of work document
:* Rama seconded the move
+
:* '''Rama''' seconded the move
 
:* A voice vote was conducted; the proposal passed unanimously by a voice vote of those present on the call!
 
:* A voice vote was conducted; the proposal passed unanimously by a voice vote of those present on the call!

Revision as of 17:29, April 19, 2017

Meeting Notes - Data Stewardship Committee - 2017-04-17 2 p.m. EST / 12 p.m. MST / 11 a.m. PT

  • Join the meeting from your computer, tablet or smartphone.
  • You can also dial in using your phone.
  • United States: +1 (408) 650-3123
  • Access Code: 453-694-565


Attendees: Matt Mayernik, Sophie Hou, Shelley Stall, Ruth Duerr, Rama, Bruce Caron, Paul Lemieux, Jamie Collins, Heather Brown, Nancy Hoebelheinrich, David Moroni, Mark Parsons, Bob Downs, Shannon Leslie


Notes:

1) ESIP Program Committee update

  • Main agenda item has been preparing for all hands Summer Meeting
  • Also: Travel support is available to support speakers for the meeting (although deadline has already passed for the 2017 meeting in Bloomington)

2) Conference reports

*Objective: Gathering & aggregating list of repository software
*Ultimately: Produce a registry of tools
  • Rama: Whatever comes of it will be of interest to our committee; hopefully some of us can provide input (see web link)
  • Matt heard from attendees that our Data Rescue document was a hot topic at the meeting
  • Rama: Invited speaker (Michael Diepenbroek, co-chair of RDA’s "Fitness for use" WG) at upcoming Information Quality Cluster telecon (Tuesday May 9, 11 AM EDT) will be talking about some RDA-related topics; might be of interest to DS cluster folks
  • EGU 2017: At least one person (Mark Parsons) plans to attend
  • Sophie: Reports that she, Nancy and Shelley have been invited to a meeting hosted by Belmont Forum to discuss how to develop training/education for data-related skills
  • Other members from the Data Stewardship Committee might also have been invited.

3) Data Management Training - Working Group Proposal

  • Discussion
  • Nancy:
  • Thanked everyone for support of the initiative. Will add comments she received from Rama and others to the scoping document.
  • The new status (if approved) will make it easier to obtain funding for projects such as improvements to the DMT Clearinghouse (via hiring of a Drupal engineer)
  • Only real potential downside: The more formal Working Group status will commit the participants to a specific (two year) time frame for project completion
  • Bruce: Budgets for WGs go through their parent committees
  • Some funding discussion ensued; Nancy described some previous/current DMT activities
  • Sophie: We really have two project needs: (1) Technical maintenance/development of the Clearinghouse Drupal infrastructure, and (2) development of new training content for the Clearinghouse
  • The WG status might help provide a pipeline for funding of (1), while (2) will be a more involved, ongoing task
  • Vote on proposal
  • Matt solicited any objections to the proposal; none were heard
  • Nancy moved to make the DMT Working Group a formal Working Group of the DS Committee in accordance with the statement of work document
  • Rama seconded the move
  • A voice vote was conducted; the proposal passed unanimously by a voice vote of those present on the call!