1 / 14

Brokering IG session

Brokering IG session. 4 rd RDA Plenary Amsterdam, 22-24 Sep 2014. S. Nativi, Jay Pearlman and Max Craglia. Activity. « Brokering Governance » WG Statement WG committed members and Stakeholders

rina-guthrie
Download Presentation

Brokering IG session

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Brokering IG session 4rdRDA Plenary Amsterdam, 22-24 Sep 2014 S. Nativi, Jay Pearlman and Max Craglia

  2. Activity • «BrokeringGovernance» WG Statement • WG committedmembers and Stakeholders • GEOSS, WDS/ICSU, CEOS, SeaDataNet, IODE, OneGeology, EC Regional programmes, EPOS, GEO-BON, CLARIN, IPCSR, DataCite, SIOS, NSF Bcube, …. • Chairs: Max Craglia (EuropeanCommission), S. Nativi (CNR), Jay Pearlman (IEEE/Univ. Colorado) • Recognized Potential Use Cases • GEO-BON • ICSU-WDS • EC Danube • SIOS

  3. WG Proposal Status • Wide interest from the Community –comments received and addressed in a revised version of the statement • “TAB is convinced the topic has merit and the team is right”; WG asked to refine details of case statement demonstration • New Description submitted and under review • The WG has already about 20 members (https://rd-alliance.org/group/brokering-governance.html)

  4. Brokering IG Agenda Monday, Sept 22 2014 13:30–15:00 White Room • The BrokeringGovernancePlan • Updates on the WG statement • Governanceactivities (whatshouldbeincluded) • Governancemodels and sustainability • Use Cases • Updates from the major multidisciplinaryprogramsand initiatives (i.e. Stakeholders) • Plan Forward

  5. Broker Requirements • Support users and further interoperability; • Be sustainable; • Support and be compliant with national and international policies (including research objectives); • Support core technical capability advancement, be accessible to a wide range of users; • Create a flexible adaptable framework for incorporation of new developments; • Offer a range of services essential to multi-disciplinary science collaborations –this range of services is expected to grow. • Scalable; supports a wide range of standards and data models • Open, transparent, trustworthy (improved managed access] • Consider – incorporation of RDA metadata wg outputs and capabilities such as metadata harvesting, linked data. Show how different approaches integrate

  6. Governance Areas Assessment of Sustainability (Business Models) • Relation between brokering organization and data/service providers (typically called an service agreement) • FITSF is an open source management guidelines – look at commons licenses (service license or operations license agreement • Agreements may include: • Agreements for notification of changes in formats for data or metadata or changes in web interface protocols • Confirmation of access requirements and release policy • Requirements for sign-on and authorization • Intellectual Property Rights – including access, use and reuse • Security requirements for data uptake and distribution • Code of conduct (e.g., will not distribute user information) • License Agreements (service or operation license agreements) • Other ?????

  7. Business Models • Information and Ad sales • - Google is available at no cost for search and for visualization of earth information. Google is supported by advertising and sale of collected information. Facebook has the same model. • Product (Document) Sales • - Standards organizations (IEEE, ISO, etc.) sell standards documents and rely on volunteers and corporate participation to formulate standards. • Corporate Support • - OGC has a membership model with fees for participation (different levels are available) and relies on volunteers. • - The Open Source Initiative is moving from a volunteer base to a member/affiliate base. They focus on licenses. The financial base comes from corporate sponsors.

  8. Business Models • “Software as a Service” (SAS) Model • Companies provide a mixture of base and enhanced services. • Wikipedia defines a similar freemium model -“Freemium is a pricing strategy by which a product or service (typically a digital offering such as software, media, games or web services) is provided free of charge, but money (premium) is charged for proprietary features, functionality, or virtual goods • - Model can work through individual sales or large scale subscriptions. • - Examples: WordPress has an open source component (wordpress.org) and a service component (wordpress.com) The latter offers enhanced services for fee. Redhat follows the same model. • Government Funding • - GEOSS solicits support from governments for their secretariat operations, both in funds and in staff assignments.. • - Pan-European research Infrastructures provide an information service based on government grants.

  9. Adopters Participation • Roles and Responsibilities: • Adopters will use selected business model and will participate in a service agreement (including the initial formulation of such agreement • Broker will provide the agreed upon service and duration of service • Adopters will exercise the use cases for an agreed duration • Adopters will provide feedback on positive and negative aspects of model and service agreement including recommendations for updates. • Adopter will participate in writing a final recommendation to RDA as an outcome of the working group

  10. Use Cases • International repositories: ICSU WDS • ( Michael Diepenbroek, Mustapha Mokrane) interested in coordination of 50 members of WDS – there were challenges Metadata catalog was part of a certification process for member infrastructures. Metadata catalogs are not standard – now working on portal update; use brokering to extend framework – prefer open source project • Environmental sciences: European Commission Danube SDI • (Max Craglia) 19 countries in the basin, EU regional development strategy, include both EU and non-EU countries. • Global Changes: GEO-BON • (Wim Hugo/Tobias Spears) – Leipzig meeting will define broker interface of 7 data families for biodiversity to reach across data families – persistent reuse (into GBIF), brokering instructions will be reusable – moving to common practices • SIOS (Svalbard Integrated Observation System) • (Bente Lye) Four Country Arctic agreement for data resources, communication and interface.

  11. Work Plan Tasks • TB1: Brokering process definition and definition of terms; agreements with adopters (sub-WG 2) • TB2: Review of initial governance model; considerations of options (sub-WG 1) • TB3: Stakeholders apply/test the governance model; document experience (sub-WG 3) • TB4: Analysis of governance model – examination of updates; testing of updates (WG) • TB5: Develop recommendations for a brokering framework governance approach; (recommendations by each sub-WG) • TB6: Review recommendation with a broad stakeholder and RDA Communities; and • TB7: Report writing

  12. WG Schedule

  13. Next Steps • Creation and Operation of three subworking groups (sub-WG) • 1. Business model sub-WG • 2. Service (license?) agreement sub-WG • 3. Use Cases sub-WG • Open Solicitation for participation • Meeting of WG to review models, agreements and use cases; create consensus goals and schedule • Meeting of sub-WG to address sub-WG charter definition including planned outcomes and schedules

  14. Thankyou !

More Related