[Silvana Muscella]

Dear Fotis,
thank you for the iterated version.
Some brief comments from my side based on some recent developments that
would merit being addressed:
1. *The Global Landscape section 2.2 *should be merged with the *Section
4 RDA value proposition & assets  – Proposed directions*, which, in my
opinion, is provided too late on in the document and makes for the most
important text in the document we could make this section a bit more
prescriptive towards the relevance within the RDA mapped with the global
landscape text parts;
2. The following reference cited on page 16: “/The flow of money from
the different regions via the RDA Foundation to cover the Secretary
General’s salary raises some concerns in terms of transparency.”
/I believe could be misleading, from my understanding the secretary
general salary’s is paid out via the RDA Foundation entity, through the
RDA Europe 4 project from March 2018 at least.
3. The section *4.3.2  Engagement with Industry *would merit the
description of the very detailed agenda produced for the Data Innovation
summit in Jan 2018 which shows a relevant demonstration of mapping
recommendation & outputs of RDA to industrial use cases – so this should
be included here;
4. *National nodes going forward -* I believe we should capitalise on
what is taking place this week with the launch of the *RDA Austrian node
*which seems to be a fitting example of cross-synergy between national
golden nuggets in this case Austrian & Italian national node exchanges,
synergies amongst other European efforts in this case (Openaire & EOSC)
will put RDA in a good position as the *”community consensus forum”; *We
should put this in as a type of Annex calling it something along the
lines of: “National Nodes Already In Action” *….
4. EOSC HLEG *for a brief update on the work within the second group of
the EOSC HLEG. Whilst the first group mapped out relevant
recommendations that went on to support multiple calls of the future
workprgramme of EC H2020. This EOSC HLEG wishes to concentrate on seeing
if it can help support a more hands-on experience built on assets for
an: “*EOSCInPractice”* for 2018.
What does this mean?  So some keywords coming out of the discussions
are: Data being *Certified *is Key; Trustworthy Data; Through Trusted &
*Certified repositories *that respect *FAIR *principles; Providing
*recognition*/citation for the data producer or curator; Introducing a
*series of certification levels *or *seals*; Researchers wanting seals
of approach that will ultimately improve their *reputation***as well;
*GDPR Compliance*…… etc,..
So with this  – we are trying to put together some valid *pilot use
cases, of past working service models building on past assets *that we
can introduce that can involve multiple member states.  Emphasising all
of this with linkages with RDA would be vital in my opinion ad will
strive to work on that in the report.
I would strongly recommend to try & reduce this current report down to
15 pages maximum or we risk getting lost in translation.
hope you find this useful
best wishes silvana

Discussion