Skip to main content

Notice

The new RDA web platform is still being rolled out. Existing RDA members PLEASE REACTIVATE YOUR ACCOUNT using this link: https://rda-login.wicketcloud.com/users/confirmation. Please report bugs, broken links and provide your feedback using the UserSnap tool on the bottom right corner of each page. Stay updated about the web site milestones at https://www.rd-alliance.org/rda-web-platform-upcoming-features-and-functionalities/.

RE: [council-strategy] Discussion of the Strategy Subcommittee documents by OAB…

  • Creator
    Discussion
  • #120084

    Sandra Collins
    Participant

    Thanks Francoise, Mark.
    Francoise, are you happy to progress this by email without setting up a telco to discuss? I note you can’t make the next Strategy telco on 6th March, so we could look for a quick call before then if you want to discuss any aspects?
    Otherwise please go ahead as you have agreed with Mark – seems a good approach!
    Thanks and best wishes, Sandra.
    – Show quoted text -From: francoise.genova=***@***.***-groups.org [mailto:***@***.***-groups.org] On Behalf Of Francoise Genova
    Sent: 25 January 2017 07:34
    To: Parsons, Mark; Council Strategy subcommittee
    Subject: Re: [council-strategy] Discussion of the Strategy Subcommittee documents by OAB…
    Le 25/01/2017 00:10, Parsons, Mark a écrit :
    Thanks Francoise. These comments should be posted to the RfC.
    Some of them are already. If we want to post ‘OA comments’ I have to check with Amy & Fotis beforehand.
    I can rewrite the first paragraph of the strategy of interconnections document to better explain the problem. Would that be helpful?
    yes please
    Finally, they are right. We need to close the RfC soon and offer our final recommendations to Council.
    I agree. It would be good to close the RfC at the end of the month, keeping a link to it from the Subcommittee page so people can see what happened.
    Cheers
    Francoise
    cheers,
    -m.
    On Jan 12, 2017, at 09:28, Francoise Genova wrote:
    Dear colleagues,
    The OAB was meeting today and the meeting agenda included a discussion of the three documents the Strategy Subcommittee submitted to RfC. Some of the attendents had posted comments (some of them today) on line and I encouraged them to continue to do so so that we keep track. I also promised to pass my notes from the meeting to the Subcommittee, hence this message. Juan (as well as Hilary who was proposed as a substitute at the last minute) could not attend, but we addressed the ‘standards body’ document anyway because I told them that we want to produce a final version soon – I had in mind that our next meeting would be early February, but I am afraid I was wrng and it will be later, which is a bit too bad because there is some momentum in what we do.
    The attendance were is agreement with our approach, and provided several comments I find useful:
    * Training & Education: They agree with the approach that RDA supports the activity but does not own the process. The comparison with Research Repository Certification (owned by DSA and WDS) was found appropriate, and it was also found appropriate that RDA does not enter into a competition with organisations for which training and education is a main aim (and a source of income). We were warned not to be too prescriptive, and allow the current approach to evolve in the future. I agree that it will be useful to add ‘the current approach is’ rather than providing a statement which look like it should stay true forever. It was also suggested that we should propose as a strategy in the domain. The proposed strategy was that RDA support internship to form the next generation. My answer, supported by Amy, was that this is a possible role for the regional projects if they wish/can because one needs to know local situations to efficiently decide on internship, not a role for RDA Global.
    * Strategy of interconnections: People agree with the statements but the general feeling is that it is difficult to understand why the paper exist when reading it. The feeling was really widely shared so I think that we have to have a further look with that in mind. The advice is to structure the document better starting with what the issue is. It was also noted that our approach is good because this positioning does not come in competition with other organisations (the Belmont Forum was cited) but allows for finding the best way to work together.
    * Standardisation body: Raphael Ritz reminded the discussion of the early Task Force which set up RDA policy on the subject. One interesting comment is that some of our outputs may not have a natural host among the existing standards bodies – what will we do if we think that they have the potential to be standards. The comment is posted on the RfC page (as well as my own comment on a possible fourth recommendation following the December Chair Collaboration meeting).
    Finally, OAB members strongly recommend that we give an explicit updated limit date to post comments to the RfC. I told them we would need the comments within two weeks. This may be too early if our meeting is later than what I had thought but I tend to agree that we need an explicit closure date for the RfC and I also think that it should not be too far from the original one. We have to have enough time to take the late comments into account before our next meeting.
    That’s all for the moment
    With my best wishes for this new year
    Francoise

    Full post: https://www.rd-alliance.org/group/council-strategy-subcommittee/post/dis
    Manage my subscriptions: https://www.rd-alliance.org/mailinglist
    Stop emails for this post: https://www.rd-alliance.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/54992
    The contents of this e-mail (including attachments) are private and confidential and may also be subject to legal privilege. It is intended only for the use of the addressee. If you are not the addressee, or the person responsible for delivering it to the addressee, you may not copy or deliver this e-mail or any attachments to anyone else or make any use of its contents; you should not read any part of this e-mail or any attachments. Unauthorised disclosure or
    communication or other use of the contents of this e-mail or any part thereof may be prohibited by law and may constitute a criminal offence.
    If you receive this e-mail by mistake please notify the system manager @ 6030219.
    Tá an ríomhphost seo (agus aon iatán a ghabhann leis) príobháideach agus rúnda agus d’fhéadadh sé a bheith ina chion coiriúil.
    Má bhfuair tú an ríomhphost seo trí earráid, dean teagmháil le bainisteoir an chórais @6030219

  • Author
    Replies
  • #132148

    Mark Parsons
    Member

    I don’t think we need a telcon. I will do as Francoise suggests.
    cheers,
    -m.
    On Jan 25, 2017, at 12:26, Sandra Collins wrote:
    Thanks Francoise, Mark.
    Francoise, are you happy to progress this by email without setting up a telco to discuss? I note you can’t make the next Strategy telco on 6th March, so we could look for a quick call before then if you want to discuss any aspects?
    Otherwise please go ahead as you have agreed with Mark – seems a good approach!
    Thanks and best wishes, Sandra.
    – Show quoted text -From: francoise.genova=***@***.***-groups.org [mailto:***@***.***-groups.org] On Behalf Of Francoise Genova
    Sent: 25 January 2017 07:34
    To: Parsons, Mark; Council Strategy subcommittee
    Subject: Re: [council-strategy] Discussion of the Strategy Subcommittee documents by OAB…
    Le 25/01/2017 00:10, Parsons, Mark a écrit :
    Thanks Francoise. These comments should be posted to the RfC.
    Some of them are already. If we want to post ‘OA comments’ I have to check with Amy & Fotis beforehand.
    I can rewrite the first paragraph of the strategy of interconnections document to better explain the problem. Would that be helpful?
    yes please
    Finally, they are right. We need to close the RfC soon and offer our final recommendations to Council.
    I agree. It would be good to close the RfC at the end of the month, keeping a link to it from the Subcommittee page so people can see what happened.
    Cheers
    Francoise
    cheers,
    -m.
    On Jan 12, 2017, at 09:28, Francoise Genova wrote:
    Dear colleagues,
    The OAB was meeting today and the meeting agenda included a discussion of the three documents the Strategy Subcommittee submitted to RfC. Some of the attendents had posted comments (some of them today) on line and I encouraged them to continue to do so so that we keep track. I also promised to pass my notes from the meeting to the Subcommittee, hence this message. Juan (as well as Hilary who was proposed as a substitute at the last minute) could not attend, but we addressed the ‘standards body’ document anyway because I told them that we want to produce a final version soon – I had in mind that our next meeting would be early February, but I am afraid I was wrng and it will be later, which is a bit too bad because there is some momentum in what we do.
    The attendance were is agreement with our approach, and provided several comments I find useful:
    * Training & Education: They agree with the approach that RDA supports the activity but does not own the process. The comparison with Research Repository Certification (owned by DSA and WDS) was found appropriate, and it was also found appropriate that RDA does not enter into a competition with organisations for which training and education is a main aim (and a source of income). We were warned not to be too prescriptive, and allow the current approach to evolve in the future. I agree that it will be useful to add ‘the current approach is’ rather than providing a statement which look like it should stay true forever. It was also suggested that we should propose as a strategy in the domain. The proposed strategy was that RDA support internship to form the next generation. My answer, supported by Amy, was that this is a possible role for the regional projects if they wish/can because one needs to know local situations to efficiently decide on internship, not a role for RDA Global.
    * Strategy of interconnections: People agree with the statements but the general feeling is that it is difficult to understand why the paper exist when reading it. The feeling was really widely shared so I think that we have to have a further look with that in mind. The advice is to structure the document better starting with what the issue is. It was also noted that our approach is good because this positioning does not come in competition with other organisations (the Belmont Forum was cited) but allows for finding the best way to work together.
    * Standardisation body: Raphael Ritz reminded the discussion of the early Task Force which set up RDA policy on the subject. One interesting comment is that some of our outputs may not have a natural host among the existing standards bodies – what will we do if we think that they have the potential to be standards. The comment is posted on the RfC page (as well as my own comment on a possible fourth recommendation following the December Chair Collaboration meeting).
    Finally, OAB members strongly recommend that we give an explicit updated limit date to post comments to the RfC. I told them we would need the comments within two weeks. This may be too early if our meeting is later than what I had thought but I tend to agree that we need an explicit closure date for the RfC and I also think that it should not be too far from the original one. We have to have enough time to take the late comments into account before our next meeting.
    That’s all for the moment
    With my best wishes for this new year
    Francoise

    Full post: https://www.rd-alliance.org/group/council-strategy-subcommittee/post/dis
    Manage my subscriptions: https://www.rd-alliance.org/mailinglist
    Stop emails for this post: https://www.rd-alliance.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/54992
    The NLI Strategy 2016-2021 – Collect, Protect, Connect, Innovate and Collaborate.
    ___________________________________________
    Straitéis 2016-2021 – Bailiú, Cosaint, Ceangal, Nuáil, agus Comhoibriú
    The contents of this e-mail (including attachments) are private and confidential and may also be subject to legal privilege. It is intended only for the use of the addressee. If you are not the addressee, or the person responsible for delivering it to the addressee, you may not copy or deliver this e-mail or any attachments to anyone else or make any use of its contents; you should not read any part of this e-mail or any attachments. Unauthorised disclosure or communication or other use of the contents of this e-mail or any part thereof may be prohibited by law and may constitute a criminal offence. If you receive this e-mail by mistake please notify the system manager @ 6030219.
    Tá an ríomhphost seo (agus aon iatán a ghabhann leis) príobháideach agus rúnda agus d’fhéadfadh go mbeadh eolas inti atá faoi phribhléid dhlíthiúil. Ní ceadmhach úsáid an ríomhphoist seo d’éinne ach don té ar seoladh chuige é. Mura duitse an ríomhphost seo nó an té atá freagrach as é a sheoladh, tá cosc ar chóipeáil agus ar sheachadadh an ríomhphoist seo agus aon iatán a ghabhann leis chuig éinne nó úsáid a bhaint as a bhfuil ann; ní ceart an ríomhphost seo nó aon iatán a léamh. D’fhéadfadh go mbeadh cosc iomlán dlíthiúil ar sceitheadh nó comhfhreagras nó aon úsáid eile gan chead ar a bhfuil sa ríomhphost seo agus d’fhéadfadh sé a bheith ina chion coiriúil. Má fuair tú an ríomhphost seo trí earráid, déan teagmháil le bainisteoir an chórais @6030219

    Full post: https://www.rd-alliance.org/group/council-strategy-subcommittee/post/re-
    Manage my subscriptions: https://www.rd-alliance.org/mailinglist
    Stop emails for this post: https://www.rd-alliance.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/55113

Log in to reply.