Organisational Assembly - Tokyo (Closed meeting)

RDA Organisational Assembly - Closed Meeting

(only for Organisational Members and Affiliates)

Minutes

Plenary 7, Tokyo

Tuesday 1 March 2016, 16:30-18:00

Room 201 & 202

Chair: Juan Bicaregui

  1. Call to Order
    • Present: Walter Stewart, Juan Bicarregui (co-chairs), Aaron Addison, Kevin Ashley, Fran Berman, Ingrid Dillo, Fabrizio Gagliardi, Jason Haga, Leif Laaksonen, Larry Lanom, Mustapha Mocraine, Amy Nurnberger, Claudia Oellers, Mark Parsons, Rob Quick, Raphael Ritz, Eefke Smith, Andrew Treloar, Doris Wedlich, Ross Wilkinson, Michael Witt, John Wood, Stephen Wolff, Malcolm Wolski, and Fotis Karayannis (RDA Secretariat)
  2. Update from RDA Council,10'
    • Fran Berman (Council co-chair): Council members have been working on making Council more effective: more traditional board of operating. Council has decided to create Council sub-committees, staffed not only from Council, but also from the RDA leadership. Target is more n depth work. Think it will be positive. In any case try it out. Yesterday talked about committees. But also there was a funders forum meeting: funders who already fund or want to fund: 20 funders. Today (earlier Council meeting) we spent all of our time going through what we have heard. How to move forward. Council is concerned about sustainabitiy of the RDA organisation, which includes Mark, the secretiarat, the RDA Plenaries, etc. A lot of discussion around that. In depth engagement from RDA committies. Depth and variation useful for us. The OAB has already a sense of how RDA can survive.

    • John Wood: (Council co-chair): Yes. Funders forum and agreed about subcommittees. Will ping some of you. More work to come. How we should be involved in getting standards and DMPs in place. Encourage researchers and help them to move towards adoption. Need to pave the way. Another area: ask funding agencies about their views on the future.

    • Ross Wilkinson: Another issue emerged strongly in Paris: How will RDA engage with equals as partner organisations? Number of such orgs. E.g. OECD, GEO. Does not reflect the quality of the relationship that RDA wants to have. Ok WDS. What about ICSU? Some degree of thinking at Council area, some at technical area, other leves etc. So how many relationships can we afford? How do we decide? This is also an issue for OAB to reflect. Larry: On the relationship to other groups at diff levels: might need to involve also the WGs. Ross: Mechanism for deciding who from RDA will interact with the other group (e.g. 5 from RDA and 5 from others). E.g. Mark pick your 5 favorites! Next 5? But may not work. The notion of WG may not be the only way or appropriate in all cases. The OAB may reflect on this. Juan: Need to say how much volunteer effort is needed. Mark: I get request e.g. to get an RDA talk or an RDA rep for such and such a meeting. Fran-Ross: The ambassador. Mark: But the OA can also work on this.

    • John Wood: JC Burgelman, European Commission (EC), DG Research and Innovation (DG RTD), is the RDA interface with the discussions on the European Open Science Cloud (EOSC). We need to think as RDA, what do with do in this area. Leif Laaksonen: Who is the EC representative in the funders forum? Has it moved away from DG Connect to DG RTD. John: Main interface is Robert Jan Smits (Director General of DG RTD). Different dynamics in RTD. More funding available, but more towards applications (rather than e-Infrastructures). One-to-one discussions with RTD, we don’t have such discussions with DG Connect/e-infrastructures. Leif: From Europe: bigger change than expected. DG RTD interfaces: Robert Jan Smits, but at lower level JC Burgelman here in Japan. Philippe Froissart (Research Infrastructures) also linking.

  3. Presentation of new OAB members  - OAB Member list, 10'
  4. OA Clustering/Mapping Exercise, Leif Laaksonen, CSC, Finland, -SLIDES, 10'
    • Leif: Already presented in Paris, but the short version in the OA open meeting. Didn't have time to do the full version in the Paris closed OA meeting. So thanks.
    • Going through the slides (see link above)
    • Fran: It would be good if we can have a clustering picture like the TAB one. Leif: Yes the group discussed a lot about this. But it was difficult and there was no convergence. Some members could not be self-recognised as data providers, users, etc. But maybe try to do this exercise in the future. Once in every year? Follow-up? Discuss this in the future.
  5. OAB Value and Engagement of RDA OA - Where to from here, Follow-up from Open meeting and next steps , Amy Nurnberger (Columbia University Libraries) and Stephen Wolff (Internet2), 20' - Updated document and SLIDES
    • [This point was covered in the open meeting and it will be followed up in the next meetings]
  6. Encouraging Adoption and Maintenance of RDA Recommendations, Presentation of adopted document by TAB-OA, Mark Parsons, RDA Secretary General, 20'
    • Andrew Treloar: TAB co-chair: The main question to answer around adoption is how to ensure the outputs of WG(IGs) are adopted as wisely as possible and are adoptable as widely as possible. OAB is supposed to write an adoption report. A small task force among secretariat, TAB, OAB worked between Dec 2015-Jan 2016 and drafted a the Consensus document . Also with chairs from TAB, OAB oked the document. But WG/IG Chairs said that they need more time. Most probably the comments from the WG Chairs would be minor tweaks. But we will see. If more comments, again at OAB for discussion.
    • Andrew: What is the relation between RDA and standards/standard bodies? Contribution to standards via RDA work is ok. Part of me is worried.  But maybe can be taken up by third parties. Raphael: Data Foundation Terminology WG: Input to an ISO standards committee. Rework of vocabulary. Ingrid: Certification to be adopted by both orgs. Kevin: Different thing RDA and different the RDA members. RDA not a standards body. Mark: It is really a messaging issue. At plenary 2 there was community discussion and it was clear: RDA is NOT a standards body. Can backfire. We know what standards are (ISO etc.) But we produce standards with a small s. Careful in messaging as it may backfire for both (they may feel that we are with a big S) and we are not one at all! On the other hand RDA Europe worked with the European Commission to prepare so that RDA outputs are considered as technical specifications (Hilary). Larry: Say what you are not is a bad approach. Say what you are! Leif: WGs produce a lot of outputs. How we can protect that someone takes up the recommendations and not even refers to them. Fran: Mandating with a voluntary organisation is hard. But Creative Commons approach may work. Can be considered as pre-standard or standard. Mark: The highest level of outputs are now called RDA Recommendations. There are other levels besides Recommendations: Supporting outputs (some recognition), Other (no level of endorsements, e.g. surveys reports, a white paper etc.)  Jason, AIST: I got a question, what is RDA, and whether it is a standard organisation? And I said no. And they were surprised! Juan: The EC may want us to become a standards body at some level. Mustapha: In my view it is clear: RDA helps the communities to create their standards.
  7. Report on RDA finances, Mark Parsons, RDA Secretary General, 10' - SLIDES and spreadsheet
    • Mark going through the slides. 

    • Comments and discussion:

      • JISC promised to support RDA: 50K pounds for two years.

      • Finance committee chaired by Doris. Nancy from CANARIE stepping down from CANARIE, so we need to replace her in the committee.

      • Leif: Foresee any major changes? Mark: No. How many contracts: Primarily EC. Foundation is subcontractor as part of an European Commission grant. Consider if Foundation will become a partner in EC grant. Juan: Yes need to consider this.

      • Kevin: Talked about a reserve to plan for the worse. Have we set some period for the reserve. Mark: One year by 2019. John: As a charity we have to have a report.

      • Ingrid: We need to have a dimension of the total yearly budget of RDA Global. Mark: Not easy: Budget from the regions: 5 Million for 5 years +0.5 personnel + 4 million over 3 years. Around: 1.7 per year to be sustainable.

      • Fran: Need for a part time admin support! STFC? 

  8. AoB, 5’
    • Thank you to Walter for all the excellent work as a co-Chair. Juan handing gift and card signed by all members present. Kudos Walter! 
  9. OA Group Photo (see photos above).

 

Original agenda

Plenary 7, Tokyo

Tuesday 1 March 2016, 16:30-18:00

Room 201 & 202

 

Objectives of the closed part of the meeting:

Our members exclusive session at Plenary 7 is scheduled on Tuesday, 1 March 2016 from 16:30 to 18:00. We hope you plan to attend. Our agenda will focus on some major internal issues for RDA, the OA, and the OAB.  At this meeting we will be launching the move towards electing an OAB and calling for the nomination of candidates.

Chair: Juan Bicaregui

  1. Call to Order
  2. Update from RDA Council,10'
  3. Presentation of OAB members  - OAB Member list, Short statement of elected members on the role of OAB, 10'
  4. OA Clustering/Mapping Exercise, Leif Laaksonen, CSC, Finland, -SLIDES, 10'
  5. OAB Value and Engagement of RDA OA - Where to from here, Follow-up from Open meeting and next steps , Amy Nurnberger (Columbia University Libraries) and Stephen Wolff (Internet2), 20'
  6. Encouraging Adoption and Maintenance of RDA Recommendations, Presentation of adopted document by TAB-OA, Mark Parsons, RDA Secretary General, 20'
  7. Report on RDA finances, Mark Parsons, RDA Secretary General, 10'
  8. AoB, 5’
  9. OA and OAB Group Photos