DMAC Standards Process Accepted the topic name

1. DMAC Standards Process • Accepted the topic name • BUT, struggled with “What is the definition of the DMAC Standards Process?” • Did not resolve the question…. • Considered some actions of the process; • Inventory and gap analysis of standards needed by IOOS community • Identification and promotion of existing standards • Development of new standards ONLY where none currently exist. Use existing standards processes (OGC, FGDC, ISO, NASA SEEDS and follow on program) wherever possible • More later

2. GUIDANCE CONTAINED IN THE DMAC PLAN • Remove the strawman text and revert back to DMAC plan text, page 49 and 50, March 2005 , Data Management and Communications Plan for Research and Operational Integrated Ocean Observing Systems, IOOS/DMAC Standards Process. • Wording goes beyond SP and guidance statements, “endorsements” for data centers, metadata standards, data transport standards, and browse do not fit here. -- fairly strong consensus • Summary of Gaps and Concerns, good consensus • DMAC preference should be to leverage existing standards activities (collaboration) and not create new standards or standards processes unless necessary • Hard to envision one standards process being all encompassing • Different standards (e.g. metadata versus transport) may need slightly different approaches • Use process design and processes from other organizations, e.g. NASA SEEDS and follow on program may be a good fit? • ST needs to survey, identify, and evaluate what SP’s are available • Embedded collaborations • When appropriate seed projects (RFP’s or the like) into existing SP to quickly achieve goals

3. Needs for standards are dynamic. Cannot know in advance what standards will evolve • DMAC SP model must allow for evolution of standards. • Desired features of a SP (not an exhausted list – more work!) • Must lead to standards that make DMAC participation easier • Standards are appropriately sized to the requirement – not too complex • Short turnaround time for standards development - consensus • > cycle from req. spec., proposed solutions, expert and public review, acceptance • Commitment to use extant, including commercial, standards whenever possible – look for opportunities to use other SP’s • Standard must be published and available to the public review • Community driven – bottom up approach, buy-in is essential – strong consensus • Open standards are preferable • Use flexible approaches that accommodate different user perspectives - purpose minimize conflict

4. DMAC Standards Process Logic Diagram Profile Extend Adopt Proposed DMAC Standard DMAC Standard Broader Community External Standard External Standards Standards Bodies Other Standard Processes e.g. NASA SEEDS collaboration WG’s Define Req. Recommend Standard refinement Develop Standard? Test-bed Work Standard Coordination Com. Network Publication Review / moderated Offer level 2 Standard IOOS Community Input Standard Review Board Voting, conflict resolution Review, Revise, Certify Publish Results Promote into DMAC Service No Yes

5. Proposed Action – Short term Guidance/Recommendations (General) • Inventory DMAC standards needs and gaps • Identify other SP’s models useful to DMAC, mimic, establish relationships, collaborate • Propose a process that; • Publication of proposed standards • Community input • Expert moderation • Refinement • Leads to DMAC standards certification • Promotes community buy-in

6. Guidance for Providers, strong consensus • Report to Ocean.US any standards or standards processes you are currently using • Participate in forums for other standards (e.g. MMI for metadata) • Guidance for DMAC ST, Ocean.US, and ExComm • Establish Expert Team on Data Standards Process • Create a Web site collaboration environment (location TBD) for discussion of DMAC data standards, consensus • Establish list of DMAC recommended standards and forums • Create a Web site forum for discussion of NetCDF conventions (Unidata logical choice) • Create a Web site forum for discussion of XML schema • Create other Web site fora as appropriate • Look to other agencies and activities to provide these services when possible

7. Proposed Action – Longer term Guidance/Recommendations • Connect agency grants/contracts funding to DMAC standards • Develop a DMAC standards process that is non-duplicative and tightly coupled with existing standards processes • Use existing standards and standards processes wherever they exist and are appropriate • Create a new independent standard or standards process only when absolutely necessary

8. Key existing and related programs • NASA SEEDS and follow on program • OGC • FDGC • ISO • IEEE • W3C • IETF • WMO • ANSI • Other EU initiatives - SeaDataNet? • Community activities in need of a standards process • QARTOD • CF • OTS • WOCE

9. Resource estimate • Dedicated and funded staff support to Expert Team • Estimate 0.5FTE per Expert Team (Ocean.US or outside) • Also recommend a full-time Ocean.US Steering Team/Expert Team coordinator • ST designated representative to participate in Expert Team – assess standards needs • Travel, etc • ST designated representative to participate in other Expert Team meetings • For relationship building and collaboration assessment • Travel, etc • Expert Team Portal support • Web site administration