OA(B) July 2016 call

Organisational Advisory Board meeting

(open to all Organisational Members)

Friday 15 July 2016, 12:00 UTC

EU and US East Coast friendly timeslot

Draft minutes

Partial recording available.

  1. Call to Order - Chair: Juan Bicarregui
    1. Amy (co-chair) , Jason Haga (AIST), John Towns (NCSA), Juan (co-chair), Kevin Ashley (UK DCC), Lien Le (AU RDS), Mark (RDA Secretary General), Robert Quick (Indiana Univ.), Robert Mc Donald (Indiana Univ.), Sebastian Karcher (QDR), Stephen Wolff (Internet2), Susan Reilly (LIBER), Thanassis Tiropanis (Web Science Trust), and Fotis (RDA secretariat-OAB liaison) (please double check as I didn't get all surnames)
  2. Roll Call - 10'
    • Approval for recording - Ok.
    • Welcome to recent members: 5'
      • California Institute of Technology, USA Gail Clement
        Centro Argentino e Información Científica y Tecnológica, CAICYT-CONICET, Argentina Mela Bosch
        Data Observation Network for Earth - DataONE William (Bill) Michener
        ELSEVIER, The Netherlands Wouter Haak
        Global Open Data for Agriculture & Nutrition (GODAN) Andre Laperriere
        Αποτέλεσμα εικόνας για ICM Warsaw logo Interdisciplinary Centre for Mathematical and Computational Modelling (ICM), University of Warsaw

        Wojtek Sylwestrzak

        Research Data Services, Australia Lien Le

        John Wiley & Sons Ltd., UK  

        Deb Wyatt

      • Curently the OA is composed of 43 Organisational Members and 6 Affiliate Members (GODAN is an affiliate member). 49 members in total.
      • Lien Le, Australian Research Data Services shortly introduced RDS. She stated that besides ANDS dealing with data management aspects, Australia has also RDS dealing mainly with the data storage infrastructure, now settng up also related services and tools, aiming to share them nationally and internationaly. Another 27 federally funded projects on data in Australia.
    • The new Organisational Advisory Board - Juan- 5'
      • 10 members (2 seats from industry empty).
        • Juan explained briefly the 10 member OAB acting as an executive committtee of the whole OA with the 49 members, and stated that there are two members from industry vacant. He reminded the discussion from previous meeting, that the OA should working to attract new industrial members, trying to find the active members from industry and invite them (see action below). He proposed to discuss this topic in the Denver f2f meeting.
        • Action Fotis: Include in the agenda the topic of industrial engagement in RDA and the RDA OA.
      • Background:
  3. Minutes from previous meetings (besides last meeting) - 5'
    • March Tokyo meetings:
    • Open actions:
      • Fotis to invite OAB members to (self-)nominate for the Funding sub-committe. Closed
      • Fotis to notify Jaime on behalf of the OAB Chairs that he has been nominated in the sustainability sub-committee to represent the OAB. Fotis to subscribe Jamie.Closed
      • Fotis/secretariat to get the industrial RDA individual members who have participated to at least two plenaries. Open. See agenda item 5.
      • Amy and Stephen to update the Value & Engagement (V&E) document to take into account the Future Directoins document and recent discussions. Other volunteers welcome. Open. See agenda item 5. 
      • Include in the V&E discussion the topic of who to engage and how. Discuss this in the next meeting.Open. See agenda item 5.
      • Jamie, Malcolm, Raphael and Fotis to work on the template for collecting OA members expertise. Open. See agenda item 6.
      • Mark, Kathy and Fotis to see if a template for OAB reviews makes sense - Open
      • Volunteers to send nominations for 1. Finance and 2. Sustainability and Funding subcommittees
        • None nominated for 1. and Jamie Shiers nominated for 2. Open - See agenda item 5.
      • Fotis to implement the changes on the OA-OAB public group and the OAB private group and inform the RDA Groups. Closed.
        • Keep the current OAB working space under both the same url  and a new url and rename the title as Organisational Assembly. All OAB meetings remain under this public OA page (open to all OA members). Closed
        • Create a new private working space for the new OAB - Closed
        • Mailing lists: Organisational assembly: rda-oab@rda-groups.org (as now) and rda-oab-private@rda-groups.org (for the new private OAB) - Closed
        • The only reported issue is that it is not possible for OA members to send messages to the private OAB list . It is confirmed that it is not possible.Use the open OAB - Closed
      • All to report issues with the new RDA website. Any comments? No comments - Closed
  4. Report from RDA Council and its subcommittees - Amy, Juan, Mark, others - 15'
    • Short Report from Council Melbourne f2f meeting- Amy and Mark - 5'
      • Amy:
        • Brought up the discussion on the value statement for members, including industry. To be discussed at the Denver f2f meeting. The Council felt that it would be good to get a number of industrial OA members on-board before nominating the seats. Make effort to establish connection with other foundations who can bring industrial members, such as the Internet foundation.
      • Mark:
        • Report from the sustainabilitie sub-committee on how to move forward. Not only dealing with financial aspects, but a lot of attention is given. The idea is to define the core services that make RDA work that need to be sustained, such as the website, the review of groups and outputs/recommendations, basic operation of governance, etc. And then put budget numbers to that. This point emerged from funders forum in Tokyo. There is pretty clear support from agencies, but struglgle how (i.e. right instruments) to fund RDA. And also they want to know what they get for the money. Effort to spell out more on this, i.e. baseline business model and budget for RDA. Very long conversation in Melbourne. Will be reporting to the sustainability committee next week. And then more in Denver.
        • Josh Greenberg from SLOAN agreed to chair the Funders Forum. He is also a member in the sustainability subcommittee. Has been very helpful and he has the motive to make it work.
        • Re. the Industrial engagement, that Amy mentioned, the Council discussed the broader industrial engagmeent (not only in OA). Patrick Cocquet (with history in Cap Digital running data experiments and datathons) and Ross Wilkinson (ANDS) to kick off a data experiment in Paris. Industry needs to hear more from RDA. They need something concrete, such as cookbooks how to handle their data.
    • Short Report from Strategy Council Subcommittee - Juan - 5'
      • Call last week, chaired by Sandra Collins. Main points:
        • How to make sure to engage all the regions around the globe. And how to place the meetings in the globe. Debated on whether the current "Europe, US, elsewhere" hosting strategy is correct. Not easy to converge. There is a tension between getting as many members together (as in European plenaries) vs. subscribing new members (as in the Japan one).
        • Training and education important
        • An RDA Europe group including Juan met with Augusto Burgueno, Head of Unit e-Infrastructures, European Commission. One of the point discussed was to get the RDA outputs as technical specifications by a multi-stakeholder platform group: Way of getting things recognised so that they are encouraged to be adopted as part of public tender procurement. The main point is whether RDA recommendations are sufficiently open. And the initial 4 RDA outputs are going through this process right now. Augusto was keen on taking this further with all the outputs. So the question to consider is whether RDA want to move towards some kind of more formal standardisation.
        • RDA as a policy body: Try to influence policy. Less urgent, RDA role is more on specifications related to openess. Push this for later.
        • Techical top-down architecture to complement the bottom-up approach: not enough time to discuss.
      • Mark: Some comments:
        • Education, which is a hot topic, also came up at Council. Not a full blown decision: But main point: Educating researchers on data practices vs. educating data professionals on being better professionals. First more in CODATA's camp and the RDA related groups in cooperation with CODATA. So RDA more focus on educating data practitioners.
        • Desire for standardisation also from US agencies and other countries: But we don't want to become a standardisation body like ISO; aim at something which looks like a standard as discussed before.
        • Re. policy: RDA is not a policy body. But in the funders forum, there is interest in policy implementation discussions. Juan: I agree. An example  is around Data Management Plans (DMPs). In Europe there is now a policy that all EC-funded project should have DMPs. And would welcome input from RDA on what form these plans will look like. 
    • Short Reports from other Council Subcommittees - Mark - 5'
      • Sustainabilty: Reported to Councili in Melbourne and will be working on the budgeting issue.
      • Finance: Quiet late. But they will become more engaged now with the budgeting discussions. What they have done up to now is to establish fiscal policies and rules for the RDA Foundation.
      • Communications and Engagement: Quite active.
        • Amy: Placing some priorities on the items presented to the committee:
          • Engagement (prioritised high to low):
            • 1. Identifying relevant organisations (e.g. scholarly) and suitable liaisons for these organisations.
            • 2. Using plenaries to increase membership and participation (which is also on the Strategy subcommittee- maybe join forces to discuss this - Action?). Lower priority:
            • 3. New generation of leaders. Happens organically with the different new WG/IGs.
            • 4. Developing/providing a platform for technical discussions and white papers.
          • Communications:
            • 1. RDA ambassador idea. How to implement it. Sending people to conferences to talk about RDA. Which organisations/conferences to target. And material needed.
            • 2. RDA annual report and the improved website.
            • 3. Updates from leadership groups.
            • 4. Chasing individual to come up with RDA stories.
      • Operations and Coordination: Had a meeting yesterday. Did not make it. But what they have been doing lately is to prioritize the operational stuff. e.g. TAB elections.
  5. Value and Engagement (V&E) of RDA Organisational Members - Previous meeting summary and next actions - 20'
    • Juan: Follow up from May call points.
      • V&E: Potential OA(B) contribution on RDA sustainability discussions
      • OA(B) strategy for the next years:Part of the strategy should be who to attract and how to do it. This should be integrated in the V&E exercise. Keep in mind that multiple-conflicting agendas of OA members are good for RDA (in contrast with most other organisations). Fotis: It was Ross's point.
      • Action to find industrial members who are regular participants in RDA plenaries. Fotis: This is still open.
        • Mark: Question: Do we want a large OA given the diverse requirements (OA members attracting more members)? And engaging existing members or new members? Juan: Existing members looking for benefits from RDA (the V) rather than being used as a workforce to attract new members. Both.
        • Mark: Primary value that I have been hearing from OA members: awareness point. Being part of the development process of the proto-standards, opportunity to adopt early and have ready access. The effort that Griffith University went through is a classic example of that: looking for developing new repository systems and assessed the RDA relevant recommendations, so as to understand what can be used and applied in their case.  So getting a lot of organisations (not only in OA) asking how to use the recommendations. So maybe this can be the focus: how to support the adoption of recommendations. Focusing on the adoption of recommendations will enhance the value of the OA and also foster the actual adoption of the recommendations.
        • Juan: Malcolm's table was very useful:
        • Amy: On Mark's point not becoming very large; on the other hand we need pay some attention to the diversity of membership. Mark: Yes, I meant that OA members may not necessarily want to help engaging other members. I want an as-large-as-possible OA!   
        • Stephen W.: Getting RDA recommendations as technical specifications is something that can be referred to in public procurement, proposals: seems to be a point that all members should value. Mark: Yes, talked to NIST, Bob Hanisch. It don't seem that they have something similar to what Europe has (on technical specs). But this should not hold us back. We should go out and say that these are our recommendaitons and we recommend that people use them. I had an interesting conversation with one of the Data Publishing workflows adopters on their reference model. Chicken and egg problem: They say that they will adopt it when it is a "standard", and we say we are not making it a standard until it is adopted! OA: Nice role be the first group whether these recommendations are real and are adoptable.
        • Juan: To explain a bit better what this European multi-stakeholder platform group is: They recommend the acceptability of things for public procurements, so that they are not proprietary Open review and no lock-in. So they are reviewing the RDA processes (case statements, RfC, etc.) I.e. Ensuring that the RDA process is not leading to proprietary things and lock-in.
      • V&E: Take into account the Future Directions report
    • May call summary
      • Value & engagement document should be updated further to take into account the Future Directions report. Stephen had started working on this. To complete it with the help of Amy.
      • An OAB strategy for the next years should be discussed. Part of the strategy should be who to attract and how to do it. This should be integrated in the V&E exercise. Keep in mind that multiple-conflicting agendas of OA members are good for RDA (in contrast with most other organisations). Discuss this further today.
      • V&E should also deal with the potential contribution of OA(B) to RDA sustainability which is now getting more attention at different groups (RDA funders forum, RDA Council, Council subcommittee on sustainabililty and funding.
    • Background and previous material
  6. Adoption, Endorsement and Maintenance of RDA Recommendations - The role of OA(B): Expert Commentary and Adoptability - Updates and thoughts - Amy Nurnberger, Malcolm Wolski, Mark Parsons, all - 20'
    • Juan:
      • Summary from May: Consensus for OAB to provide "expert commentary" on RDA outputs with emphasis on adoptability.
      • Open action: Jamie, Malcolm, Raphael and Fotis to work further on the process and the template based on the comments raised (see below). Fotis?
    • Fotis:
      • Two points: one on scope/process and one on the actual template:
        • Scope, Process, Incentives
          • Create a template for all members to fill in once
          • The primary purpose is for members to record their expertise for providing expert commentary on RDA outputs, but possibly also for reviewing new RDA WG charters (if this is continued).
          • The selection of OA experts may be a combination of directly asking the most appropriate candidates (based on the particular area of outputs to review and their expertise) and of a call for nominations for extra ones if needed (if proposed candidates don't agree or if there is no clear correlation with the recorded expertise).
          • There is an agreed reward for participating. Potential rewards for discussion (brainstorming):
            • Member profiles in the newsletter
            • Ribbons on their badges at plenaries. Action
            • Formal letters of appointment to help indicate it's something they can put on their CV or resumé.
            • Reduced entry fee to plenaries
        • Template for recording the expertise of OA member who will perform the expert commentary and adoptability evaluation. Starting points:
          • Some statistics on their organization (academia/research, business/enterprise/industry (with a few options big/SME/startup), region, etc.)
          • Some statistics about them (position, age group, etc.).
            • We will try to align the above with the ones that they have provided in the RDA website or take them directly from there (we can request to log in in the RDA site first), or prefill them and they can update them. 
          • Data user/generator/manager/technologist/policy maker/other
          • Expertise in vertical domains (e.g. agri, bio, physics, etc.). Some standard terminology can be used if deemed appropriate (such as Energy, Environment, Biomedical Sciences, Physics and Engineering, and Social and Cultural Innovation) 
          • Expertise in e-Infrastructures/data infrastructures/computer science (horizontal domain)
          • Involvement in standards organisations or other relevant groups
          • Involvement in national, regional data or other relevant projects
          • Interest on adoption areas (we have to see what we write here: data fabric, metadata, data services, domain-specific, …)
          • Other?
            • Comments; Juan: More represent the Organisation rather than individuals. Re. process, mix this theoretical approach (what expertise we have with what outputs need to be commented on) with the more practical approach of what we have next and just find some people to comment on them. Maybe both things in parallel.
            • Kevin: Observation on rewards: In some cases not necessary, in others ok. Bring some others on board for this, especially academics. For academics, recognition is important. Attending a meeting also. Put a set of options in the table.
            • Amy: Recognition as a possible reward yes! Perhaps both personal expertise & organisational interest!
            • Mark: Kevin good point. It is critical to have mechanisms for assessing the adoptabilty and the actual adoption of our recommendations. OA is central to that, because we want organisations to adopt the outputs. But worry how to scale. We have 20 but over time it may grow. The experts body has to be dynamic and responsible to be able to cope.
            • Fotis: Malcolm proposed to be able to consult external experts. This will help in the scaling issue. See point from previous meeting.
              • A pool of OA experts for expert commentary and adoptability of RDA outputs will be created. It would be possible to consult experts outside the RDA membership but feedback will be channeled via OA members
              • Juan: Yes, we can't expect that we have all the expertise as part of the OA.
              • Kevin: Two ways: Assign to the externals to write something up and use it if useful. The other way: Use the OA expertise to have a conversation with the experts on adoptability and it will the OA members job to write up a summary meaningful for someone else.
              • Amy: Malcolm's suggestion was that OA members should be able to consult outside experts
        • Juan: Next steps?
          • Mark: If we agree with the template ask OA members to complete it. But we have a couple of recommendations for immediate assessment. Maybe split them in categories e.g. several from data publishing gropu around workflows, data publishing services, etc. These will be appeling to data publishers and repositorians. While the data fabric ones are more attractive for data services and computing centres. How to facilitate and make this happen.
          • Juan: Knowledge base: maybe we know already many of the members and their areas. Is there a process how to go about it? Mark: Up to now it was an ppen call to the OA. But hasn't produced much.
          • Mark: We know more or less who is doing what. So possibly we tap the shoulder. Only way which may work. And maybe this is a function of the OAB.
          • Amy: Agree but a clear process how these messages is passed from group to group.
          • Mark: a more targeted approach is needed.
          • Fotis: A TAB person gives the overall framework to the OA and then the private OAB proposes suitable experts based on their expertise. Amy: Possible the other way around: The first message goes to the OAB and the second message for a targeted review to the OA.
          • Mark: Mark and Fotis discuss before each OAB call what are the outstanding recommendations and what type of expertise is available. And we put this in the OAB and come up with suggestions for organisations and who to tap in the shoulder. Amy: Not wait until the meeting, but rather over e-mail, as candidate recommendations appear. Action Fotis: Put this process in the agenda of the next secretariat meetings.
          • Sebastian: Huge e-mails intimidating. Mechanism for distributing the information? How do I send feedback? Mark-Amy: Comments are submitted on-line. See below.
        • Summary/Decisions:
          • As candidate recommendations appear, Mark and Fotis to discuss what expertise is available and make a suggestion for OAB to comment. And after convergence inside the private OAB, Fotis to send a message to the suggested organisation(s) to provide expert commentary with emphasis on adoptability and the status of actual adoption, copying the whole OA for any further comments/inputs .
          • In parallel finalise the template and ask OA members to fill it in to record expertise.
          • Assigned OA members can also use external experts to help them and the OA members can write up a summary after discussing with them. The same can be done when there is no clear expertise inside the OA.
    • Summary of May call
      • OAB focus should be on "expert commentary" and adoptability of outputs.
      • The secretariat has worked on a pilot exercise interviewing adopters to assess the adoptability of outputs. See two draft adoption reports: Workflows Adoption Report and a draft report for DDRI/RD-Switchboard. There is an intellectual effort involved to make the assessment as reviewing a paper. You need to have some expertise and understand the both the recommendations and the context of the WG/adoption. So if we put together a board, it will be more than commeting, rather assessment.
      • Deabte on whether RDA is too regulatory and whether more power should be given to the community rather than the governance boards. Rewards may be needed also.
      • Fotis: The template starting points not discussed yet; just initial ideas. Initial e-mails focused more on the process.
        • Action: Jamie, Malcolm, Raphael and Fotis to work further on the template and the process based on the comments raised (see below)
    • Decision from April call
      • Decision: A pool of OA experts for expert commentary and adoptability of RDA outputs will be created. It would be possible to consult experts outside the RDA membership but feedback will be channeled via OA members.
    • Background and previous material
  7. WG/IG updates and RFCs / TAB update - 10'
  8. Short news from secretariat- Mark, Fotis - 5'
    • Mark - Secretariat news:
      • Recruited one member and loosing one member: Lynn Yarmey new member from RDA US as director of community developement in US. But half time for RDA Global-secretariat. Active in engagement and the ambassador program. Also taking over the TAB support role from Kathy. Kathy continues as a volunteer. On the other hand, Herman Stehouwer will be leaving at the end of this month. To be replaced by a more admin person. 3.5-4 FTEs. Overqualified with PhDs. Trying to hire an admin person and try this direction. 
      • Communications plan drafted - Mark. Rotate responsibilities across regions. And now we are producing a monthly newsletter. June-July the first ones.
      • Future directions document: on-going effort. Implementation on the secretariat with the support from Council sub-committees.
      • Draft document on roles and responsibilities for secretariat to run smoothly. Not easy to match with what we have. Mark: I have dual role: Outreach and engagement of the community and also the operational part. But I was advised to work more on the first. So Stefanie Kethers will be doing more of the latter.
    • Future plenaries update
      • Plenary 8 - Denver, 11-16 September 2016, in conjunction with International Data Week: Hopefully a landmark event! Draft schedule (internal). Plenary schedule to be available next week.
      • Plenary 9 - Barcelona, Spain  (organised by BSC). 3-7 April 2017. Venue: Barcelo Sants.
      • Next plenaries
    • RDA individual membership updated monthly statistics: almost 4200 members in July 2016 .
  9. Next OAB Meetings - 5'
    • Μeeting in August: Doodle for last week of August. Action Fotis: Create a doodle for the last week of August. Australian-friendly.
    • OA(B) Meetings in Denver - How about Thursday the 15th
      • OA Open Session: 11:30-13:00 - Same as previous
      • OA Closed Session: 14:00-15:30 - Invite all members of the OA in the closed session. Present from OAB to the OA with the presence of Council.
      • OAB private session?
    • Doodle vs. fixed schedule? 2 meetings for two different timezones in the same week?
  10. AoB
    • TAB Landscape Overview Group, Steve Diggs - not available.
      • Mark:
        • As part of the Strategy sub-committee there is a discussion about an architecture for RDA. I am opposed to that as such (bottom-up) infrastructures do not have architectures a priori.  But, having said that, it is important to understand how our recommendations can be stiched together and how the different groups interact. A variety of effort to address that. And TAB currently trying to come up with a way how the WG/IGs intersect: notion of a landscape overview. There was a first effort on this a couple of years ago, but only a snapshot over time. The challenge is how to make this be maintained by the groups themselves so that it stays current and dynamic. So Steve Diggs has been working on some tools that help display the information, collecting metadata on what they are doing and how they are interrelated. So a TAB group is working on this led by Steve. He gave a presentatoin in the last WG/IG chairs meeting. Good to do it also here. In one of the next ones, or in Denver. Action Fotis: Depending on the next meeting schedule invite Steve to make a presentation. F otis: Far East friendly and possibly US west coast?
        • Raphael: https://sites.google.com/site/tablogdiagrambeta/ and scroll down

Original agenda

Fri, Jul 15, 2016 12:00 PM - 1:30 PM UTC

Connection details:

Please join my meeting from your computer, tablet or smartphone: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/986137381

Location

Local time

Time zone

UTC offset

Los Angeles (USA - California)

Friday, 15 July 2016, 05:00:00

PDT

UTC-7 hours

Denver (USA - Colorado)

Friday, 15 July 2016, 06:00:00

MDT

UTC-6 hours

Washington DC (USA - District of Columbia)

Friday, 15 July 2016, 08:00:00

EDT

UTC-4 hours

Buenos Aires (Argentina)

Friday, 15 July 2016, 09:00:00

ART

UTC-3 hours

London (United Kingdom - England)

Friday, 15 July 2016, 13:00:00

BST

UTC+1 hour

Paris (France - Île-de-France)

Friday, 15 July 2016, 14:00:00

CEST

UTC+2 hours

Athens (Greece)

Friday, 15 July 2016, 15:00:00

EEST

UTC+3 hours

Tokyo (Japan)

Friday, 15 July 2016, 21:00:00

JST

UTC+9 hours

Canberra (Australia - Australian Capital Territory)

Friday, 15 July 2016, 22:00:00

AEST

UTC+10 hours

Wellington (New Zealand)

Saturday, 16 July 2016, 00:00:00

NZST

UTC+12 hours

Corresponding UTC (GMT)

Friday, 15 July 2016, 12:00:00

 

 

You can also dial in using your phone.

Access Code: 986-137-381

Phone numbers

Australia : +61 2 8355 1040, Austria : +43 7 2088 0034, Belgium : +32 (0) 28 93 7018, Canada : +1 (647) 497-9350, Denmark : +45 69 91 88 64, Finland : +358 (0) 923 17 0568, France : +33 (0) 170 950 592, Germany : +49 (0) 692 5736 7211, Ireland : +353 (0) 15 360 728, Italy : +39 0 247 92 13 01, Netherlands : +31 (0) 208 080 219, New Zealand : +64 9 909 7888, Norway : +47 75 80 32 07, Spain : +34 955 32 0845, Sweden : +46 (0) 853 527 836, Switzerland : +41 (0) 435 0167 13, United Kingdom : +44 (0) 330 221 0086, United States : +1 (646) 749-3129

First GoToMeeting? Try a test session: http://help.citrix.com/getready

  1. Call to Order - Chair: Juan Bicarregui
    • Record meeting
  2. Roll Call - 10'
  3. Minutes from previous meetings (besides last meeting) - 5'
    • March Tokyo meetings:
    • Open actions:
      • Fotis to invite OAB members to (self-)nominate for the Funding sub-committe. Closed
      • Fotis to notify Jaime on behalf of the OAB Chairs that he has been nominated in the sustainability sub-committee to represent the OAB. Fotis to subscribe Jamie.Closed
      • Fotis/secretariat to get the industrial RDA individual members who have participated to at least two plenaries. Open. See agenda item 5.
      • Amy and Stephen to update the Value & Engagement (V&E) document to take into account the Future Directoins document and recent discussions. Other volunteers welcome. Open. See agenda item 5. 
      • Include in the V&E discussion the topic of who to engage and how. Discuss this in the next meeting.Open. See agenda item 5.
      • Jamie, Malcolm, Raphael and Fotis to work on the template for collecting OA members expertise. Open. See agenda item 6.
      • Mark, Kathy and Fotis to see if a template for OAB reviews makes sense - Open
      • Volunteers to send nominations for 1. Finance and 2. Sustainability and Funding subcommittees
        • None nominated for 1. and two -Jamie Shiers and Stephen Wolff- self-nominated for 2. Open - See agenda item 5.
      • Fotis to implement the changes on the OA-OAB public group and the OAB private group and inform the RDA Groups. Closed.
        • Keep the current OAB working space under both the same url  and a new url and rename the title as Organisational Assembly. All OAB meetings remain under this public OA page (open to all OA members). Closed
        • Create a new private working space for the new OAB - Closed
        • Mailing lists: Organisational assembly: rda-oab@rda-groups.org (as now) and rda-oab-private@rda-groups.org (for the new private OAB) - Closed
        • The only reported issue is that it is not possible for OA members to send messages to the private OAB list - Open. It is confirmed that it is not possible.
      • All to report issues with the new RDA website. Any comments?
  4. Report from RDA Council and its subcommittees - Amy, Juan, Mark, others - 15'
    • Short Report from Council Melbourne f2f meeting- Amy and Mark - 5'
    • Short Report from Strategy Council Subcommittee - Juan - 5'
    • Short Reports from other Council Subcommittees - Mark - 5'
  5. Value and Engagement (V&E) of RDA Organisational Members - Previous meeting summary and next actions - 20'
    • For today's call:
      • Follow up from May call points.
        • V&E: Take into account the Future Directions report
        • OA(B) strategy for the next years: Who to attract and how to do it. Can do this as part of the V&E exercise.
        • V&E: Potential OA(B) contribution on RDA sustainability discussions
    • May call summary
      • Value & engagement document should be updated further to take into account the Future Directions report. Stephen had started working on this. To complete it with the help of Amy.
      • An OAB strategy for the next years should be discussed. Part of the strategy should be who to attract and how to do it. This should be integrated in the V&E exercise. Keep in mind that multiple-conflicting agendas of OA members are good for RDA (in contrast with most other organisations). Discuss this further today.
      • V&E should also deal with the potential contribution of OA(B) to RDA sustainability which is now getting more attention at different groups (RDA funders forum, RDA Council, Council subcommittee on sustainabililty and funding.
    • Background and previous material
  6. Adoption, Endorsement and Maintenance of RDA Recommendations - The role of OA(B): Expert Commentary and Adoptability - Updates and thoughts - Amy Nurnberger, Malcolm Wolski, Mark Parsons, all - 20'
    • For today's call
      • See summary from May: Consensus for OAB to provide "expert commentary" on RDA outputs with emphasis on Adoptability (see below)
      • Discuss the template proposa (see below)
    • Summary of May call
      • OAB focus should be on "expert commentary" and adoptability of outputs.
      • The secretariat has worked on a pilot exercise interviewing adopters to assess the adoptability of outputs. See two draft adoption reports: Workflows Adoption Report and a draft report for DDRI/RD-Switchboard. There is an intellectual effort involved to make the assessment as reviewing a paper. You need to have some expertise and understand the both the recommendations and the context of the WG/adoption. So if we put together a board, it will be more than commeting, rather assessment.
      • Deabte on whether RDA is too regulatory and whether more power should be given to the community rather than the governance boards. Rewards may be needed also.
      • Fotis: The template starting points not discussed yet; just initial ideas. Initial e-mails focused more on the process.
        • Action: Jamie, Malcolm, Raphael and Fotis to work further on the template and the process based on the comments raised (see below).
    • Work on the template for recording OA expertise: Main points discussed over e-mail:
      • Scope, Process, Incentives
        • Create a template for all members to fill in once
        • The primary purpose is for members to record their expertise for providing expert commentary on RDA outputs, but possibly also for reviewing new RDA WG charters (if this is continued).
        • The selection of OA experts may be a combination of directly asking the most appropriate candidates (based on the particular area of outputs to review and their expertise) and of a call for nominations for extra ones if needed (if proposed candidates don't agree or if there is no clear correlation with the recorded expertise).
        • There is an agreed reward for participating. Potential rewards for discussion (brainstorming):
          • Member profiles in the newsletter
          • Ribbons on their badges at plenaries. Action
          • Formal letters of appointment to help indicate it's something they can put on their CV or resumé.
          • Reduced entry fee to plenaries
      • Template starting points:
        • Some statistics on their organization (academia/research, business/enterprise/industry (with a few options big/SME/startup), region, etc.)
        • Some statistics about them (position, age group, etc.).
          • We will try to align the above with the ones that they have provided in the RDA website or take them directly from there (we can request to log in in the RDA site first), or prefill them and they can update them. 
        • Data user/generator/manager/technologist/policy maker/other
        • Expertise in vertical domains (e.g. agri, bio, physics, etc.). Some standard terminology can be used if deemed appropriate (such as Energy, Environment, Biomedical Sciences, Physics and Engineering, and Social and Cultural Innovation) 
        • Expertise in e-Infrastructures/data infrastructures/computer science (horizontal domain)
        • Involvement in standards organisations or other relevant groups
        • Involvement in national, regional data or other relevant projects
        • Interest on adoption areas (we have to see what we write here: data fabric, metadata, data services, domain-specific, …)
        • Other?
    • Decision from April call
      • Decision: A pool of OA experts for expert commentary and adoptability of RDA outputs will be created. It would be possible to consult experts outside the RDA membership but feedback will be channeled via OA members.
    • Background and previous material
  7. WG/IG updates and RFCs / TAB update - 10'
  8. Short news from secretariat- Mark, Fotis - 5'
    • Secretariat:
      • Communications plan drafted - Mark
    • Migration to the new website - Please report any issues
    • RDA individual membership updated monthly statistics: almost 4200 members in July 2016 .
    • Future plenaries update
      • Plenary 8 - Denver, 11-16 September 2016, in conjunction with International Data Week: Draft schedule (internal)
      • Plenary 9 - Barcelona, Spain  (organised by BSC). 3-7 April 2017. Venue: Barcelo Sants.
      • Next plenaries
  9. Next OAB Meetings - 5'
    • Any meeting in August?
    • OA(B) Meetings in Denver - How about Thursday the 15th
      • OA Open Session: 11:30-13:00
      • OA Closed Session: 14:00-15:30
      • OAB private session?
    • Doodle vs. fixed schedule? 2 meetings for two different timezones in the same week?
  10. AoB
    • TAB Landscape Overview Group, Steve Diggs (tbc)
    • Stop recording