Preservation June 2012

ESIP Preservation and Stewardship Cluster Monthly Telecon 2012-06-06

Attendees:
Bruce, Curt Tilmes, Sarah Ramdeen, Ruth, Jeff Palmer, Anne, Carol, Rama.

Notes:
1) Curt – Talk about recent worked and the upcoming talk.
2) Planning for July Monthly meeting – suggested skip the July meeting by telecon due to holiday (July 4th) conflict and instead will meet at the ESIP Summer Meeting and again in August.
3) This is the final meeting before the Summer Meeting.  Not much Stewardship planned.  There is the Thursday identifiers session led by Nancy and Greg.  This is on the lessons learned about DOIs.  And we will have a Friday morning meeting for the committee.

State of the Art Document – New ESIP members should review and consider the principles, identifiers and data citation sections.  Committee members are asked to review and edit if you have time.  Rama has done some work but there might need to be more.

Ruth suggested we work on the PCCS.  Rama should create one, might use template from the others as it is a key bit.

Rama – had a question about authorship – clarify committee not just writers/authors for the document.  Also asked if Carol/Erin had an official name for the committee.

Ruth – Authors or something simple not the umbrella committee but it should also show the committee some/cluster but different from the authorship.

PCCS and perhaps other for the future.

For the committee – work group for common governance in general and how mature documents would move to the commons – ESIP federation approval etc.

Carol said it was approved by the executive committee.

ESIP preservation has offered to get it standardized; lesson plans/content etc will have a member on the committee.  4-5 person open membership.

Data Stewardship Committee (from Carol) is our official name.

Ruth: Data stewardship training is coming along and getting documents for training/webinars approved.  All of these materials should end up on the commons but process is not clear.  Will it make it easier or harder?

Carol: Still no ? to authority individual identifier but there will be a light touch review before publishing to the commons.  Will need to determine the change procedures and how a document gets an identifier.  Need to begin using the commons before we can get a better idea.

Ruth – provenance etc, commons of our committee – we should have a rep on that.  Ruth? Curt? Rama?  Someone should be on that group.

Anne is interested and volunteered.  Curt said will have to review the needs for the internal position.  Will need experts as well on some of these issues.  No need to be committed all the time, just when pertinent issues.

NASA earth science division site – demonstrates things we have said there is a need for.  Curt has not experienced much but good first steps, does not fill in all needs.  All scientists are directed to put publishers in the site.  All get a drupal node number as a unique identifier.  Personal also gets one as well.  URI this committee discussed issues of the approach as well.  Data sets are not covered and are our concern. Could be improved but need to see something concrete.  Can see statistics, program publisher stats etc.

Curt wants to do one across global change and groups this is a real.  His is just an idea.
…
Anne would like to see how companies to these published by NASA and who funds.  Rama – this does not reference data sets.

Curt – Falls short of our goals and identifiers and relationships and scope this committee has.

…
This committee can focus on State of the Art – how to make data available.

Final topic:
Identifiers to good data/papers (DOIs) Records for the DOIs
Semantics web group URIs around DOIs.  What about other artifacts in PCCS? And people?  Web of science ideas? And other ideas, other identifiers we should focus on?

Rama – most PCCS items are covered by documentation items.  Like calibration files, need identifiers for people etc.

Ruth – we wrote the paper and stops at data sets level.  Should we think of more granular data file level?  We might have records for those levels like locators?

D

Develop a study and consider arc/DOI as a criteria and do an assessment to develop a paper out of that.

Rama suggested it so / PCCS and work on these classify PCCS into categories and then process these categories.

How did that work? For the committee it can – organize a set of criteria.

Criteria and candidates from telecoms or email.

Larger audience on email then calls.  For summer meeting?  Kick start?  Recruit people at the meeting.

Jeff suggested a Delphi process 1) email 2) ISO standard 3) suggestions on data citation.  Need to have a check sum attached for researcher IDs and DOIs

Curt – good idea for identifiers paper.

Rama - part of data one stream when sent data also send a data citation so just copy/paste

Should we add that to our set of principles?

…
Need use cases.