Data Management Plans Meeting Feb 19 2015
Garry Baker, British Geological Survey Chris Brown, Jisc Rachel Bruce, Jisc David Carr, Wellcome Trust (WT) Tito Castillo, University College London Anna Clements, University of St Andrews (Chair) Matthew Dovey, Jisc Sara Jones Catherine Pink, University of Bath Rachel Proudfoot, University of Leeds Hardy Schwamm, Lancaster University David Baker, CASRAI Sheri Belisle, CASRAI
Call to order Review action items from last meeting Harmonising funders’ requirements – how can this be achieved? Use Cases Agree a core set Are some use cases still missing? Should some be disregarded at this stage? New profile format Agree what should be added to or removed from the core profile as a result of considering this core set of use cases Feedback from NSC meeting on 17th. Upcoming meetings AOB
Previous Minutes New Draft Profile – Use Case Spreadsheet Info Incorporated DMP Draft Charter/Work Plan Use Case Spreadsheets
Use case 5 – complete questions about core elements and add use case specific elements, if any Action owner: Cathy P. Completed by: March 6 Use case 6 – spreadsheet – add to profile Action owner: Sheri Completed by: Done Use case 6 – review questions and elements (after its added) Action owner: Garry Completed by: March 6 Use case 7 – complete questions about core elements and add use case specific elements, if any Action owner: Rachel Completed by: March 6 Use case 8 – complete questions about core elements and add use case specific elements, if any Action owner: Mary Completed by: March 6 Use cases 11a. and b. – complete questions about core elements and add use case specific elements, if any. (with guidance from Sheri) Action owner: David C. Completed by: March 6 Use case 12 – move into intro text for the profile Action owner: David B. Completed by: March 18 Potential use case #3 & #6 – combine and complete questions about core elements and add use case specific elements, if any. (with guidance from Sheri) Action owner: Tito Completed by: March 6 Potential use case #5 – complete questions about core elements and add use case specific elements, if any. (with guidance from Sheri) Action owner: Garry Completed by: March 6 Review data profile and answer questions (use case sections), add definitions (terms section). Action owner: Everyone Completed by: March 12 Clean up profile, move deferred use cases, renumber, etc. Action owner: Sheri Completed by: March 18
Meeting brought to order at 1:03 PM GMT
Agenda Item 2 – Review actions from last meeting.
For new members, selection of use cases in the Gdocs; owners need to determine whether the profile provides the info required.
Into the new draft profile, using the use cases, we’re placing elements needed and missing from the core list along with outstanding questions. Document is heavy, but not the final version. CASRAI will create a simplified version as a master profile, containing call use cases/information elements. Will be much cleaner at that time.
David Carr will send Sheri his first use case spreadsheet to be added to the profile. Rest of the group will finish up any outstanding use cases.
Remainder of actions completed, meeting postponed.
Agenda Item 4 – Use Cases.
(Use case review before harmonisation will work best.)
Use case 1 – complete Use case 2 – complete Use case 3 – complete Use case 4 – researcher efficiency; question to its value in the DMP. This use case will be deferred at this time. (Scope decision, can always be revisited in a future iteration.) Use case 5 – Action: Cathy will look at this one Use case 6 – Cathy has submitted a spreadsheet for this one. Actions: Will be resent to Sheri and she will add to the profile. Garry will review after. Use case 7 – Collaborative projects – Action: Rachel will complete this one. Use case 8 – IT; important, should stay. Is a driver for institutions. Related to the archive storage use case (size); but this one specific to active data. Action: Mary to review against profile. Use case 9 – complete Use case 10 – management advisory; from data service providers; subset of the plan; which elements would someone need to see red flags – are they all there? Defer this one for now. Use case 11 – is it two separate use cases? Are they satisfied by the same elements? If so they can be merged? for now, can be called 11a and 11b. Use case 12 – life cycle of metadata. This is the only one that uses the entire profile; its fulfilled when the others are filled. Motivation/aspiration for the data profile. Might be better placed in the intro text when profile is published. Does this use case express a need for mapping? This group will not be doing mapping. Action: move to intro text.
Potential use cases:
1st: About how DMPs fit the process and how that differs from the info contained in it. Is out of scope, will be deferred. 2nd: Something an inst. wants but typical DMP not detailed enough to provide. Asset register based approach. Where in the life cycle is the DMP created? Asset is something that has value and can appear at any time in the life cycle. Another group is working on dataset level metrics (CERN) – around assessment exercises. Perhaps this group could monitor progress of that group to see if it fits this use case. Relates to risk assessment and data security. Fills in as the project is developed. Add to last one. Action: Tito will provide (Sheri will provide instruction) 3rd: fundamental – one of the drivers for the profile. Is this a mapping to funder requirements? This process is to agree on requirements among stakeholders. Funders aren’t fully engaged yet. With regard to the next stage, its less about mapping, more about improving the profile with funder engagement. Profiles are meant to be a canonical map. Satisfies all stakeholders. Defer. 4th: will happen when we’ve done the rest (see 3rd). Defer. 5th: key for identifying repositories. Action: Garry will provide. 6th: keep (see 2nd).
No other key use cases missed.
Agenda Item 5 – New profile format; update.
Not enough time to go back and discuss questions raised, with only 10 minutes left. But this can be an online discussion. Action: Everyone should review document and comment/answer questions. Answer as much as possible and get the profile as cleaned up as possible before the next meeting. Keep open for additional use cases from people not in this call.
Agenda Item 6 – Feedback from NSC meeting.
DMP WG given go ahead to carry on and finish this stage. Also finish the terms section – action: add definitions. Pilot is ending. Jisc/CASRAI relationship being finalised. We have an extension to be able to complete the deliverable so it can go for wider review.
Jisc will be sending out a questionnaire/evaluation for the pilot to all the participants shortly.
Agenda Item 7 – Upcoming meetings.
Next meeting is March 19. Invites are not always showing in calendars; they must be accepted.
Once again, discussion/minutes will be posted on the CASRAI website.
Adjourned 2:02 PM GMT.