OAB August 2015 meeting

Organisational Advisory Board meeting agenda

Thursday 27August 2015, 10 pm UTC

  • Thursday 27 August 3:00pm PDT-California, USA
  • Thursday 27 August 6:00pm EDT, Washington DC, USA,
  • Thursday 27 August 11pm BST, London UK
  • Friday 28 August 12am CEST, Amsterdam, Barcelona, Bonn
  • Friday 28 August 1am EEST, Athens-Helsinki
  • Friday 28 August, 7:00am JST, Tokyo
  • Friday 28 August, 8:00am AEST, Canberra
  • Friday 28 August, 10:00am NZST, Wellington

US-AU friendly

Draft Minutes

  1. Call to Order. Present: Aaron Addison, Amy Nurnberger, Andrew Treloar, John Towns, Juan Bicarregui, Ross Wilkinson, Guru Siddeswara, Nick Jones, Walter Stewart, Fotis Karayannis (RDA secretariat)
  2. Roll Call
    • New Org members: The Netherlands e-Science Center and today Web Science Trust, University of Southampton, UK
    • Note: we now have 32 Organisational Members and 5 Affiliate Members. 37 members reached.
  3. Minutes from previous meetings
    • Minutes from May call - Approved
    • Minutes from June call - Approved.
      • Open actions:
        • From older meetings:
          • Juan/Walter: After the OAB clustering effort is done, organise a joint meeting with TAB.
          • Recurring item: Juan/Walter/Fotis: Include in the OAB agendas an standard item for new WGs/RFCs
          • Recurring item: Juan/Walter/Fotis: Include outputs/outputs review as a regular/frequent item in the agenda.
          • Recurring item: OAB Chairs/RDA secretariat to ask OA for volunteers for champions to drive this process.
          • Juan to check on the W3C rules on consensus forming for their WGs - Closed.
          • Juan-Walter to review the list of benefits - Fotis to send the link to the OAB for comments - Deadline: September the 8th.
        • From June meeting:
          • Recurring item: OAB members to prepare for volunteering championing WG/IGs during the Paris meeting (as OA liaisons)
          • Secretariat to get the number of members of each group. Also possibly which people are in the same groups.
            • Secretariat discussed this issue without converging. Main issue is that such metrics may be misleading.
            • Wolfram Horstmann sent graphical statistics: Link1, Link2, Link3, Link4
            • Juan: Not convergence; impressive graphics from Wolfram.
        • From July meeting:
          • Walter to communicate the OAB document on outputs, adoption and consensus to TAB and Council. Action: Walter to send it formally to TAB today. Action: Walter to send it to the Council in time for the Paris meeting.
          • Amy to send updated comments, taking into account the OAB comments wrt Guru's points- Done
          • Patrice to review PID collections - Open
          • Adam to review PID collections - Done.
  4. Preparation for September OA meetings - Open meeting:
    • Thursday 24 September 11:00 - 12:30 (tbc), so as to allow the business people to attend (Experimentation day with posters from private sector on Thursday)
      • Open meeting sub-title: Private sector engagement in RDA
        • Discuss speakers/items
          • From July meeting:
            • Engagement of private sector/SMEs. SMEs boundaries. What's worth and what's not
            • Adoption and sustainability issues
          • From August meeting:
            • Ross: Having a wide range of orgs with varying research data infrastructure needs is interesting.
            • Action: Walter to ask Patrick from CAP Digital as organiser to give us a list of the participating companies. Fotis: RDA secretariat may be able to help.
            • Ross: Do a gap analysis on Leif's OAB clustering survey's material which may be interesting for many orgs, including SMEs. Action: Juan to ask Leif whether he can present the survey results analysis at the open session.  
            • Amy: Need to ask the new participants coming to the open session, what they need/why they are interested.
            • Walter: Include in the agenda a general OA summary for newcomers
            • Ross: What has happened and what is in the pipleline from an organisations' perspective. TAB person to present.
  5. Future Directions Planning organic group, Walter
    • Summary from July meeting:
      • 3 areas identified: Communication, Coordination and Engagement. More work is needed with the Governance bodies: More work on identifying data ambassadors/champions for disciplines/geographical areas. Speak within the disciplines and come back to RDA with feedback. Improving our communication planning. Improving communicaiton within RDA and the RDA regions. Growth: Plenaries together with other activities. E.g Next year September common plenary with CODATA/WDS.
      • Ross: Where the broad group need to be involved as well where the secretariat and other groups should focus. The group will report in Paris.
      • Next steps: 3 webinars per region to update the community on the Future Directions planning process and to get their feedback. Then the main points to be presented in Paris.
        • Dates:
          • 24 August — 12:00 Melbourne Time (02:00 UTC) - Took place this week
          • 3 September — 14:00 Paris Time (12:00 UTC)
          • 9 September — 13:00 New York Time (17:00 UTC)
    • August meeting:
      • Walter: Webinars on-going. Slidedeck presented in Australasia. Plan is to collect feedback from the webinars and analyse it inside the group. Final report for adoption by Council. The webinars are meant to engage broadly the RDA community. More than 60 registered for EMEA and Americas.
      • Ross: Wider group of people forming bridges providing feedback. All good, but one topic not covered: what happens beyond WG/IGs. E.g. testbeds, outputs uptake into products. This is not well covered. Council has noted that and will be working on it. Andrew: Also relevant for TAB.
      • Juan: Is there a process turning the discussion into something concrete? Walter: The final report will contain concrete actions for the next 3 years to take the RDA where it should be in these next 3 years.
  6. The role of OAB in reviewing outputs, driving adoption and forming consensus - OAB Group (Amy, Juan, Leif, , Stephen, Walter)
    • Walter: Sub-group met on the week of the 27th of July (Amy, Stephen, Walter). Sent a summary doc with recommendations. Document Link approved by OAB in July call
    • Points:
      • The OAB should recommend the following regarding the OAB role in outcome adoption:

        • For each proposed case statement, the OAB should appoint a minimum of two reviewers from amongst the OA representatives to review the proposal from the perspective of potential impact and likely adoption and from the perspective of ensuring no undue organisational bias.  While OA reviewers may have technical questions, those issue are the responsibility of the TAB.
        • The review process should be standardized with an agreed set of questions to streamline the process for the reviewers and to bring consistency to the review process.
        • Reviewers should have access to a training and orientation resource to prepare them for the function.
        • Reviewers should be selected to represent a diverse set of organisations.
        • The OAB should receive a progress report from the TAB liaison person on each working group at the 6 and 12 month mark and the opportunity to respond to progress from an organisational perspective.
        • Were Council to establish a process for formal endorsement of completed outcomes, the OAB should participate in any assessment process  with  particular responsibility for assessing likely adoption and likely impact of adoption.
        • The OAB should review adopted impacts on an on-going basis to assess when it is appropriate for the outcome to be updated to avoid a level of divergence in the use of the output that will begin to compromise interoperability.
      • In addition, the OAB co-chairs should express to Council the OAB’s deep concern that outcomes must be sustained and renewed.  There is currently no formal process for that process given that working groups stand down after 18 months.  The issue must be addressed
      • Points from July meeting:
        • The meaning of bias was clarified; it means balanced, rather than promoting a single's organisation's viewpoint. 
        • The evolution of recommendations over time may not be RDA's responsibility. The IETF model could be used.
        • Definitions around adoption are needed. This should be done as part of the OAB review process (define questions, etc.)
        • The document deals more with new WGs. Dealing with existing/on-going WGs may be handled at a case by case basis.
        • Review questions should not be too narrow, but rather more broad, i.e. contributing to adoption, but not limit things for adoption.
      • August meeting:
        • Ross: Detect dessention opposed to consensus (to detect dessentive views). I.e. why organisations are not adopting an output and why. Need to have a clear understanding whether an output is adoptable and to get diverse views from organisations. Detect varations that might be useful.
        • Aaron: Key point. I am Involved in an early adoption grant. Whether theory meets practice. Critically important: 1. Solving the problem,  2. Can be used widely. Otherwise considerable challenges.
        • Juan: Yes, it would be useful to understand why an organisation is taking another route if not adopting an RDA output.
        • Ross: Routine questions for OAB review as part of WG/IG: Is this relevant to your orgs? Are you williing to adopt it? But also feedback from orgs not willing to adopt: why not?
        • Guru: Cost assessment issue of adoption also to be part of the routine questions?
        • Ross: Two phases: Adoptability at initial phase and sustaining adoption in the long term (given the potential dynamic nature of outputs)
        • Walter: Reminder from July meeting: It was agreed that OAB will now review new case statements (from OAB point of view, i.e. in terms of adoptability, consensus etc..
        • John: What was not discussed: Transition of an output towards an operational data service (US NDS or EU EUDAT)
        • Ross: Every 6 months to have a document with a summary of what happened in terms of adoption in other orgs and what is in the pipeline. Andrew: We do that already in the plenaries. Ross: But optimised for different types of orgs. Andrew: I can see the value but difficult to extract the information from the groups. Juan: Pick a few groups to present their outputs at the open session? Amy: What is the difference from bulet 5? Agreed that this point should be part of bullet 5.
    • Background:
      • Wiki page with summary of main points discussed.
  7. WG/IG updates and RFCs / TAB update - Kathy- Andrew - Fotis
    • New recognised and endorsed groups:
    • Request for Comments (RFCs):
      • New WG/IGs:
        • PID Collections WG - Case Statement
          • Open action: Patrice to review this from the OAB perspective  work on this.
          • Adam acted as a second reviewer.
        • Discussed in May: Metadata Standards Catalog WG - Case Statement
          • Guru sent comments in an e-mail. More technical. OAB members should be performing a review more relevant to the outputs and their adoption, while the TAB review is more technical. So complementary approaches. Kevin: MSC is not only interested in the metadata standards submitted by the RDA WGs (which may be a small number).
        • Ethics and Social Aspects of Data (ESAD) IG  - Recognised & Endorsed
      • Recommendations (stay for around one month for comments)
    • August meeting:
      • Andrew: Continuing the usual business. Issues: High number of IGs and small number of WGs. Sustainability of outputs issue. Output vs. software to implement the output discussion. Version 1 vs. Version 2 issue and related issues (responsibilities, etc.).
      • Andrew: To include this in the Paris Council meeting. Ross: Agreed. Action: Ross.
  8. OAB clustering/mapping exercise - Leif
    • Wiki page
    • Written report from previous meeting: There have been discussions on whether the TAB 2D clustering axes should be also used for OAB or another approach with new axes should be used.
    • Leif will review the entries received (see below) and then call for a new sub-group meeting.
    • More information:
    • August meeting:
      • Ross: Leif has been trying to bring the group together to do the analysis during the vacation period so that it is ready for September, but this was not possible up to now.
  9. OAB election plan - Walter
    • Document discussed in previous meetings. Also the orginal RDA Organisational and Affiliate Member process document [link]
    • Initial proposal and discussions from May and June meetngs:
      • Election to take place around the second plenary after reaching 36 members (starting before and finishing after the plenary, similarly with TAB on-line elections). 36 members now reached: Election in Japan.
      • The OAB elected group (12 people) will work more heavily. Not intend to exclude anyone. In TAB there should be a balance: region, discipline/expertise. So maybe we should have the same: region, type of organisation (data users, providers, etc.), industry/academic, gender.
      • The OAB doc says that the 12 vote for the chair but it may be reconsidered so that all vote for the chair
      • Practical issues to be dealt with. E.g. organic groups/mailing lists. Juan: change as little as possible. Maybe wise to keep one open group. Discuss in time.
    • Next plans:
    • Walter: plan accepted by Council
      1. Overall Timing: Call for Nominations at Paris closed meeting
      2. Timing for staging candidates and election of Chairs and OAB
    • August call:
      • Juan: I reviewed the TAB election doc revew: 3 types of balances: region, gender, discipline. But for OAB more type of org instead of discipline. The others relevant.
      • Action: Walter and Juan to prepare an overal proposal for Paris, including the types of balances.
  10. Preparation for September OA meetings in Paris - Closed meeting
    • Continue with the same setup: two-sessions, one open and one closed.
    • Inital plan to be discussed:
      • Closed meeting: Wednesday 23 September, 15:30-17:00 (tbc)
        • Proposed agenda: 4 main items
          1. Future Directions planning
          2. The role of OAB in reviewing outputs, driving adoption and forming consensus, esp. review process.
          3. OAB clustering/mapping exercise
          4. OAB election plan - Staging candidates
        • Council to be present; 
        • Idea from last meeting: Report/Health check on WG/IGs:Malcolm: As OAB will be getting involved in the ongoing process of WG and IG activity, it can consider a dashboard about the progress/health of each or when they were last looked at. Ross/Kevin: Flag issues that need attention, rather than regular business report.
      • August:
        • Ross: Continue today's discussion in Paris with more people.
        • Juan-Ross: A lot of clashes for the Wednesday meeting. Move it to Thursday or Friday? Clashing with funders' meeting. Urgent: Action to Fotis to investigate moving to another day.
  11. Other Business
    • Future plenaries update
      • Plenary 6 - Paris, France, 22-25 September 2016 (organised by CAP Digital)
      • Plenary 7 - Tokyo, Japan, 1 March - 3 March 2016 - New: Theme of the event: Making Data Sharing Work in the era of Open Science
        • Venue: Hitotsubashi Hall owned and operated by Hitostubashi University Address: 2-1-2 Hitotsubashi, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 101-8430 
      • Plenary 8 - New: Washington area, 11-16 September 2016, in conjunction with International Data Week
      • Plenary 9 - Barcelona, Spain  (organised by BSC). New: 3-7 April 2017. Venue: Barcelo Sants.
    • Short news from secretariat- Fotis.
      • RDA website and repository - updates. On-going work on website (already home page updated).
      • Australian blog now live: http://rdaaustralia.blogspot.com.au/
      • UK accounting firm for accounting support - discussions on contract
      • RDA individual membership updated monthly statistics.
        • Now >3000 RDA individual members
      • New: RDA foundation accepted as a charity
      • All members have either paid their dues or in the process of paying their dues (in communication with RDA secretariat). This is not the case for the new ones.
    • August meeting:
      • Aaron: apologies in advance for not being able to come to Paris. Announced candidateship for TAB elections.
  12. Next Meetings
    • Paris f2f meetings

Draft Agenda

https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/706695557

Use your microphone and speakers (VOIP) for audio. You'll sound best with a headset. PLEASE MUTE WHILE NOT SPEAKING to avoid injecting echo in the call.

You can also call in using your telephone: Access Code: 706-695-557
Canada (Long distance): +1 (647) 497-9379, Australia (Long distance): +61 2 8355 1039, Finland (Long distance): +358 (0) 931 58 4588, Germany (Long distance): +49 (0) 692 5736 7301, United Kingdom (Long distance): +44 (0) 330 221 0099, United States (Long distance): +1 (224) 501-3318, France (Long distance): +33 (0) 170 950 589. More phone numbers: https://global.gotomeeting.com/201914205/numbersdisplay.html

 

 

  1. Call to Order.
  2. Roll Call
    • New Org members: The Netherlands e-Science Center
    • Note: we now have 31 Organisational Members and 5 Affiliate Members. 36 members reached.
  3. Minutes from previous meetings
    • Minutes from May call - Approved
    • Minutes from June call - to be approved in the next meeting
      • Open actions:
        • From older meetings:
          • Juan/Walter: After the OAB clustering effort is done, organise a joint meeting with TAB.
          • Recurring item: Juan/Walter/Fotis: Include in the OAB agendas an standard item for new WGs/RFCs
          • Recurring item: Juan/Walter/Fotis: Include outputs/outputs review as a regular/frequent item in the agenda.
          • Walter to bring to the strategic planning steering committee for review the list of OA benefits
          • Recurring item: OAB Chairs/RDA secretariat to ask OA for volunteers for champions to drive this process.
          • Juan to check on the W3C rules on consensus forming for their WGs
        • From June meeting:
          • OAB members to prepare for volunteering championing WG/IGs during the Paris meeting (as OA liaisons)
          • Secretariat to get the number of members of each group. Also possibly which people are in the same groups.
            • Secretariat discussed this issue without converging. Main issue is that such metrics may be misleading.
            • Wolfram Horstmann sent graphical statistics: Link1, Link2, Link3, Link4
        • From July meeting:
          • .Walter to communicate the OAB document on outputs, adoption and consensus to TAB and Council.
          • Amy to send updated comments, taking into account the OAB comments wrt Guru's points- Done
          • Patrice to review PID collections - Open
          • Adam to review PID collections - Done.
          •  
  4. Preparation for September OA meetings - Open meeting:
    • Thursday 24 September 11:00 - 12:30 (tbc), so as to allow the business people to attend (Experimentation day with posters from private sector on Thursday)
      • Open meeting sub-title: Private sector engagement in RDA
        • Discuss speakers/items
          • From last meeting: Engagement of private sector/SMEs. SMEs boundaries. What's worth and what's not
          • Adoption and sustainability issues
  5. Future Directions Planning organic group, Walter
    • Summary from previous meeting:
      • 3 areas identified: Communication, Coordination and Engagement. More work is needed with the Governance bodies: More work on identifying data ambassadors/champions for disciplines/geographical areas. Speak within the disciplines and come back to RDA with feedback. Improving our communication planning. Improving communicaiton within RDA and the RDA regions. Growth: Plenaries together with other activities. E.g Next year September common plenary with CODATA/WDS.
      • Ross: Where the broad group need to be involved as well where the secretariat and other groups should focus. The group will report in Paris.
    • Next steps: 3 webinars per region to update the community on the Future Directions planning process and to get their feedback. Then the main points to be presented in Paris.
      • Dates:
        • 24 August — 12:00 Melbourne Time (02:00 UTC) - Took place this week
        • 3 September — 14:00 Paris Time (12:00 UTC)
        • 9 September — 13:00 New York Time (17:00 UTC)
  6. The role of OAB in reviewing outputs, driving adoption and forming consensus - OAB Group (Amy, Juan, Leif, , Stephen, Walter)
    • Walter: Sub-group met on the week of the 27th of July (Amy, Stephen Walter). Sent a summary doc with recommendations. Document Link approved by OAB in July call
    • Points:
      • The OAB should recommend the following regarding the OAB role in outcome adoption:

        • For each proposed case statement, the OAB should appoint a minimum of two reviewers from amongst the OA representatives to review the proposal from the perspective of potential impact and likely adoption and from the perspective of ensuring no undue organisational bias.  While OA reviewers may have technical questions, those issue are the responsibility of the TAB.
        • The review process should be standardized with an agreed set of questions to streamline the process for the reviewers and to bring consistency to the review process.
        • Reviewers should have access to a training and orientation resource to prepare them for the function.
        • Reviewers should be selected to represent a diverse set of organisations.
        • The OAB should receive a progress report from the TAB liaison person on each working group at the 6 and 12 month mark and the opportunity to respond to progress from an organisational perspective.
        • Were Council to establish a process for formal endorsement of completed outcomes, the OAB should participate in any assessment process  with  particular responsibility for assessing likely adoption and likely impact of adoption.
        • The OAB should review adopted impacts on an on-going basis to assess when it is appropriate for the outcome to be updated to avoid a level of divergence in the use of the output that will begin to compromise interoperability.
      • In addition, the OAB co-chairs should express to Council the OAB’s deep concern that outcomes must be sustained and renewed.  There is currently no formal process for that process given that working groups stand down after 18 months.  The issue must be addressed
      • Points from July meeting:
        • The meaning of bias was clarified; it means balanced, rather than promoting a single's organisation's viewpoint. 
        • The evolution of recommendations over time may not be RDA's responsibility. The IETF model could be used.
        • Definitions around adoption are needed. This should be done as part of the OAB review process (define questions, etc.)
        • The document deals more with new WGs. Dealing with existing/on-going WGs may be handled at a case by case basis.
        • Review questions should not be too narrow, but rather more broad, i.e. contributing to adoption, but not limit things for adoption.
    • Background:
      • Wiki page with summary of main points discussed.
  7. WG/IG updates and RFCs / TAB update - Kathy- Andrew - Fotis
  8. OAB clustering/mapping exercise - Leif
  9. OAB election plan - Walter
    • Document discussed in previous meetings. Also the orginal RDA Organisational and Affiliate Member process document [link]
    • Initial proposal and discussions from May and June meetngs:
      • Election to take place around the second plenary after reaching 36 members (starting before and finishing after the plenary, similarly with TAB on-line elections). 36 members now reached: Election in Japan.
      • The OAB elected group (12 people) will work more heavily. Not intend to exclude anyone. In TAB there should be a balance: region, discipline/expertise. So maybe we should have the same: region, type of organisation (data users, providers, etc.), industry/academic, gender.
      • The OAB doc says that the 12 vote for the chair but it may be reconsidered so that all vote for the chair
      • Practical issues to be dealt with. E.g. organic groups/mailing lists. Juan: change as little as possible. Maybe wise to keep one open group. Discuss in time.
    • Next plans:
    • Walter: plan accepted by Council
      1. Overall Timing: Call for Nominations at Paris closed meeting
      2. Timing for staging candidates and election of Chairs and OAB
  10. Preparation for September OA meetings in Paris - Closed meeting
    • Continue with the same setup: two-sessions, one open and one closed.
    • Inital plan to be discussed:
      • Closed meeting: Wednesday 23 September, 15:30-17:00 (tbc)
        • Proposed agenda: 4 main items
          1. Future Directions planning
          2. The role of OAB in reviewing outputs, driving adoption and forming consensus, esp. review process.
          3. OAB clustering/mapping exercise
          4. OAB election plan - Staging candidates
        • Council to be present; 
        • Idea from last meeting: Report/Health check on WG/IGs:Malcolm: As OAB will be getting involved in the ongoing process of WG and IG activity, it can consider a dashboard about the progress/health of each or when they were last looked at. Ross/Kevin: Flag issues that need attention, rather than regular business report.
  11. Other Business
    • Future plenaries update
      • Plenary 6 - Paris, France, 22-25 September 2016 (organised by CAP Digital)
      • Plenary 7 - Tokyo, Japan, 1 March - 3 March 2016 - New: Theme of the event: Making Data Sharing Work in the era of Open Science
        • Venue: Hitotsubashi Hall owned and operated by Hitostubashi University Address: 2-1-2 Hitotsubashi, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo 101-8430 
      • Plenary 8 - New: Washington area, 11-16 September 2016, in conjunction with International Data Week
      • Plenary 9 - Barcelona, Spain  (organised by BSC). New: 3-7 April 2017. Venue: Barcelo Sants.
    • Short news from secretariat- Fotis
    • No major news since previous meeting.
      • All members have either paid their dues or in the process of paying their dues (in communication with RDA secretariat). This is not the case for the new ones.
      • New: RDA foundation accepted as a charity
      • RDA individual membership updated monthly statistics.
        • Now >3000 RDA individual members
      • UK accounting firm for accounting support - discussions on contract
      • Australian blog now live: http://rdaaustralia.blogspot.com.au/
      • RDA website and repository - updates. On-going work on website (already home page updated).
  12. Next Meetings
    • Paris f2f meetings