Difference between revisions of "Sustainable Data Management/20200710 telcon notes"

Latest revision as of 16:46, July 10, 2020

To connect

Join from computer, tablet or smartphone at: https://www.gotomeeting.com/join/618011013

Dial in using your phone: :United States: +1 (571) 317-3122
- Access Code: 618-011-013

Agenda

summary/discussion of the TRUST mini-symposium.
Hoping some of you have read the TRUST paper: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41597-020-0486-7
Reminder: put this on your sched:
1. Aligning data publishing workflows among repositories, publishers, funders, and researches
  1. https://2020esipsummermeeting.sched.com/event/cIwG

Attending

Margaret O'Brien (scribe)
Shelley Stall
Megan Carter
Sophie Hou
Helen Glaves
Philip Tarrant
Ruth Duerr
Erin Antognoii
Rebecca Koskela (post CDF)

Regrets

Corinna
Rebecca

Notes

TRUST mini-symp concentric circles. diagram.

Recording here: https://www.rdc-drc.ca/activities/webinars/archived-webinars/

repositories focus on implementation, an inner Circle, within Aspirations (TRUST, FAIR, CARE) and certification (CTS, WDS, ISO)
- CORE https://gida-global.org/care
- Recommendations for Services in a FAIR Data Ecosystem: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patter.2020.100058
within that, the HOW (rather than the WHAT)
Aspiration (in the TRUST outer circle) are open to interpretation. Our guidelines describe implementation.

Suggestion: a Matrix:

FAIR, CARE, TRUST x repo how-items

Audience for eventual doc:
- groups aspiring to be repository
  - promote use of an existing repo instead of web page-posting)
  - even individual researchers do this.
  - Root cause of the web-page-problem: researchers cannot find repositories that meet their needs
- existing repos aspiring to certification
  - in order to fulfills what your communities ask for (fair, trust, core), here is what repo comm has determined are the base capabilities
researchers?
- repo-search tools can use these to find repos that meet your needs.

Issues a repository-how matrix does not meet:
- What about the rest of the data life cycle? some aspects happen outside of the repo.

To do: vocabularies (for us)

Define "repository": ? Other vocabulary needed (responsibility, authority,

expressed at CDF: repos get different sets of requirements from funders, publishers, community. are we adding to that? or unifying?
- Neither: we are the repository community, we address it like this. ie, repo community is at the top, defining requirements, not just the receiver.

Post link to new CDF leadership: _____
- we overlap, Corinna, Bob (others?)

Goals:

Context for justifying funding for repository improvements, alleviate repos angst (who cannot yet meet these guidelines)
Roadmap: prioritize some parts (eg, the T of trust, then items within that)
research community become discerning consumers.

Action Items

add new folks to list serve - mob
get TRUST mini symp link - mob
start a spreadsheet to brainstorm on a matrix - Ruth
look at the Sustainable DM google drive?
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1JtilFsKtmB4k3_k-dbVS-EsbM8HFQur1

@@ Line 37: / Line 37: @@
 ** Recommendations for Services in a FAIR Data Ecosystem: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patter.2020.100058
 * within that, the HOW (rather than the WHAT)
+* Aspiration (in the TRUST outer circle) are open to interpretation. Our guidelines describe implementation.
+* Suggestion: a Matrix:
+FAIR, CARE, TRUST x repo how-items
-Matrix:
+* Audience for eventual doc:
-FAIR, CARE, TRUST x
+** groups aspiring to be repository
-repo how-items
+*** promote use of an existing repo instead of web page-posting)
+*** even individual researchers do this.
+*** Root cause of the web-page-problem: researchers cannot find repositories that meet their needs
+** existing repos aspiring to certification
+*** in order to fulfills what your communities ask for (fair, trust, core), here is what repo comm has determined are the base capabilities
+* researchers?
+** repo-search tools can use these to find repos that meet your needs.
-Audience for eventual doc:
+* Issues a repository-how matrix does not meet:
-* groups aspiring to be repository (or use an existing reps instead of web page-posting) - even individual researchers do this.
+** What about the rest of the data life cycle? some aspects happen outside of the repo.
-* existing repos aspiring to certification
-Aspiration (in the TRUST outer circle) are open to interpretation. Our guidelines describe implementation.
-Root cause of the web-page-problem: researchers cannot find repositories that meet their needs
-in order to fulfills what your communities ask for (fair, trust, core)
-here is what repo comm has determined are the base capability to
-take these, and find repos that meet them.
-What about the rest of the data life cycle? some aspects happen outside of the repo.
+* To do: vocabularies (for us)
 Define "repository": ?
 Other vocabulary needed (responsibility, authority,
-CDF: repos get different sets of requirements from funders, publishers, community. are we adding to that? or unifying?
+* expressed at CDF: repos get different sets of requirements from funders, publishers, community. are we adding to that? or unifying?
-(we are the repository community, we address it like this. ie, repo community is at the top, not the receiver.)
+** Neither: we are the repository community, we address it like this. ie, repo community is at the top, defining requirements, not just the receiver.
-Post link to new CDF leadership: _____
+* Post link to new CDF leadership: _____
+** we overlap, Corinna, Bob (others?)
 Goals:
-we want to promote funding to address repos angst (who cannot yet meet these guidelines)
+# Context for justifying funding for repository improvements, alleviate repos angst (who cannot yet meet these guidelines)
-prioritize some parts (eg, the T of trust, then items within that)
+# Roadmap: prioritize some parts (eg, the T of trust, then items within that)
-roadmap.
+# research community become discerning consumers.
-research community become discerning consumers.
 ==Action Items==