Data Fabric IG

IG

Group details

Chair(s): 
Bridget Almas, Jianhui Li, Peter Wittenburg
Case Statement: 
 

The Data Fabric IG (DFIG) identified that working with data in the many scientific labs and most probably also in other areas such as industry and governance is highly inefficient and too costly. Excellent scientists working on date intensive science tasks are forced to spend about 75% of their time to manage, find, combine and curate data. What a waste of time and capacity. The DFIG is therefore looking at the data creation and consumption cycle to identify opportunities to optimize the work with data, to place current RDA activities in the overall landscape, to look what other rcommunities are doing in this area and to foster testing and adoption of RDA outputs. The goal of DFIG finally is to indentify so-called Common Components and define their characteristics and services that can be used across boundaries in such a way that they can be combined to solve a variety of data scenarios such as replicating data in federations, developing virtual research environments, etc. Much important work is being done on data publishing and citation, but DFIG believes that we need to start at early moments in the "Data Fabrics" in the labs to organize, document and manage data professionally if we want to meet the requirements of the coming decades.

  

DFIG is focusing on the data creation and consumption circle as it happens daily in the scientific and industrial labs and on the identification of ways to make this work more efficiently and thus more cost-effective.

DFIG's goal is to identify so-called Common Components and define their characteristics and services that can be used across boundaries in such a way that they can be combined to solve a variety of data scenarios.

DFIG has various spin-offs of its discussions such as work on Repository Registry, the acceleration of the testing activities, the huge terminology problems we have, self-registration of CoCos, etc. These will appear partly on this site but will also fork into new RDA groups or be dealt with at other places.

Current Core Group Activities

  1. Data Fabric IG Document (documents created by the DFIG)
  2. Meeting Notes
  3. Use Cases (description of use cases that describe concrete "data fabrics" in the various labs)
  4. Components / Services (description of components that have been identified)
  5. Testing and Adoption of RDA Outputs (description of tests & adoptions and drawing conclusions)
  6. Repository Registry (discussion about the Repository Registry component)
  7. Guidelines (Recommendations)
  8. Composition Building - Finding Minimal Metadata for PIDs
  9. Composition Building - Towards the Global Digital Object Cloud
  10. Broker-Driven Core Component Workflows

135 reads

 

Recent Activity

29 Mar 2017

Document for recommendation session of DFIG

Dear Data Fabric IG members,
attached is a document which resulted from the many different contributions to the PID topic, in particular also from the intensive interactions in GEDE. In our view it indicates a lot of consensus about core assertions. We would like to discuss this at the coming Recommendations session of the Data Fabric IG at P9.
The intention is to
- discuss this document and its assertions,
- to identify views which are perhaps missing,
- to identify persons who want to be in a focus group (charrette) to further discuss this topic,

10 Mar 2017

Data Fabric Sessions in Barcelona: Topics include PIDs, Brokering and Education/Training

Data Fabric IG Members:
Just a reminder about the sessions we have scheduled for P9 in
Barcelona. We hope you will participate!
*Breakout 3, 5 April 2017 16:00-17:30**
*
*Joint Session of IG Brokering, IG Data Fabric: Advancing Data Fabric
with Brokering services*
/Primary meeting objective:/ Develop a set of workflow patterns using
brokers for mediation between the core components of the Data Fabric to
meet the needs of various use cases.
See

24 Feb 2017

AW: [rda-oab][rda-datafabric-ig] Re: [rda-oab][rda-datafabric-ig] [rda-oab][rda-datafabric-ig] [rda-datafabric-ig] 3 DFIG items and one action

Thanks Jamie.
Absolutely d'accord with what you state: we need to get things into production and it is great that you in particular are very successful.
As indicated DFIG would be happy to include your points into its discussions.
best
Peter
Von: Jamie.Shiers=***@***.***-groups.org [mailto:***@***.***-groups.org] Im Auftrag von Jamie Shiers
Gesendet: Freitag, 24. Februar 2017 08:05

24 Feb 2017

AW: [rda-oab][rda-datafabric-ig] Re: [rda-oab][rda-datafabric-ig] [rda-oab][rda-datafabric-ig] [rda-datafabric-ig] 3 DFIG items and one action

Thanks Jamie.
Absolutely d'accord with what you state: we need to get things into production and it is great that you in particular are very successful.
As indicated DFIG would be happy to include your points into its discussions.
best
Peter
Von: Jamie.Shiers=***@***.***-groups.org [mailto:***@***.***-groups.org] Im Auftrag von Jamie Shiers
Gesendet: Freitag, 24. Februar 2017 08:05

24 Feb 2017

Re: [rda-oab][rda-datafabric-ig] [rda-oab][rda-datafabric-ig] [rda-datafabric-ig] 3 DFIG items and one action

Dear Peter,
Thanks for these clarifications.
From the HEP side I would like to point out:
- In 2013 I presented a 2020 vision for long-term data preservation in HEP to the International Committee for Future Accelerators (ICFA)
- In 2016, we presented a paper at iPRES on the PRODUCTION services that CERN offers for the above

22 Feb 2017

Fwd: [rda-datafabric-ig] 3 DFIG items and one action

Dear all,
Perhaps some of you were as surprised as me to receive this mail with “recommendations on what we should do next”.
I could certainly comment on the contents of the document - e.g. the references to HEP, the EIROforum - but my main issue is process. Is DFIG - of even a subset - tasked to make such “recommendations”?
Maybe I am mis-reading this mail; maybe it is another example of “volunteer” work (and not official); maybe I have mis-read the Council mandate?
Cheers, Jamie
Begin forwarded message:
From: Peter Wittenburg