Task Forces Discussion

Where we discuss anything related to the RDA (catchall)

Moderators: Leif.Laaksonen, SaraPittonetGaiarin

Task Forces Discussion

Postby HermanStehouwer » Wed Mar 20, 2013 8:26 am

Dear all,

This is the place for comments, volunteering, critisism, etc. on the Task Forces.

Cheers,

Herman
HermanStehouwer
 
Posts: 28
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2012 1:19 pm

Re: Task Forces Discussion

Postby bethplale » Wed Mar 20, 2013 8:37 am

Sign me up to work on Technical Advisory Board task force. best, beth plale
bethplale
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 6:29 pm

Re: Task Forces Discussion

Postby fgenova » Wed Mar 20, 2013 11:04 am

please sign me up to the 'how are associated organisations associated' TF (or whatever its real name is)

Francoise
fgenova
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:49 am

Re: Task Forces Discussion

Postby JuanBicarregui » Thu Mar 21, 2013 3:43 pm

I'd just like to check the names that I have from the lists on the wall and the posts here. Currently, the following have volunteered to work on these Task Forces:

TAB selection process task force:
Peter Pissierssens
Jamie Shiers
Stan Ahalt
David Giaretta
Bill Michener
Mustapha Mokrane
Beth Plale

Other Tasks forces

Affiliation of Organisations:
Francoise Genova
Esther Dzale Yeumo

Are there any more volunteers?

Juan.
JuanBicarregui
 
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2012 12:58 pm

Re: Task Forces Discussion

Postby Gary » Fri Mar 22, 2013 12:35 pm

Given the discussion at the Launch should the http://rd-alliance.org/ site contain a section or something else on Interest Groups (IGs) as well the Work Group section that is there?
Gary
 
Posts: 27
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2012 7:45 pm

Re: Task Forces Discussion

Postby Jamie.Shiers » Fri Mar 22, 2013 12:37 pm

Dear Juan,

Assuming that the work is not too onerous, please sign me up for the

Affiliation of Organisations task force too.

Thanks a lot, Jamie Shiers CERN / DPHEP
Jamie.Shiers
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2012 9:43 am

Re: Task Forces Discussion

Postby HermanStehouwer » Fri Mar 22, 2013 2:05 pm

Gary wrote:Given the discussion at the Launch should the http://rd-alliance.org/ site contain a section or something else on Interest Groups (IGs) as well the Work Group section that is there?


I guess there should be. We will pick it up.

As an aside: feel free to criticise and suggest improvements to the current texts!
Nothing is set in stone. We are still mostly working with a feeling about what things should be.
I.e.: WGs: short-term concrete impact; IG: long-term area-of-interest WG-spawning ground.
HermanStehouwer
 
Posts: 28
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2012 1:19 pm

Re: Task Forces Discussion

Postby Gary » Fri Mar 22, 2013 2:40 pm

Herman,

Thanks...There is probably good deal of updating the main speakers could offer.
The current About section focuses on the Launch (now past) and I'm sure people have some good updates
to this material. You have sections on Organization and WGs etc., but perhaps rather than the launch material your would add 'a little bit
on these in the About section.

This could be from such things as Fran's brief which had more about how RDA will operate than the current section.

"Working groups will serve as accelerants to data sharing practice and infrastructure. Work products / deliverables to include
Adopted standards
Deployed infrastructure
Adopted policy
Implemented best practice, etc."

Maintaining these sites can be arduous.

One obvious very small thing is to update the Past and Future events.
Under Future events you still have the RDA Official Launch, Gothenburg, March 18-20 2013
rather than the Sept plenary in DC.

This timeline in About should also add the 2nd plenary.
Gary
 
Posts: 27
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2012 7:45 pm

Re: Task Forces Discussion

Postby kashley » Mon Mar 25, 2013 12:12 pm

JuanBicarregui wrote:I'd just like to check the names that I have from the lists on the wall and the posts here. Currently, the following have volunteered to work on these Task Forces:
.....
Are there any more volunteers?

Juan.


I failed to get to the lists on the wall in time so can't recall all of the options for volunteering. I'm willing to volunteer for the TAB process Task Force, though it seems as though you may have sufficient names there already. Possibly, alternatively, for the TAB itself, depending on the outcome of the Task Force and what type of TAB emerges.
kashley
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2013 10:32 am

Re: Task Forces Discussion

Postby JuanBicarregui » Thu Mar 28, 2013 10:13 am

Here are some thoughts intended to trigger discussion on the open questions in the current TAB Processes document (http://rd-alliance.org/s/TAB-Processes-v04.pdf)

"Question TB1: Should we have something under rights, about TAB members having a right to contribute to WG discussions?"
I didn’t hear any comments on this, but I think it is clear that this is one of the roles for TAB. There is already a point under Expectations which reads: “The Technical Advisory Board is expected to work with RDA Working Groups to promote adoption and effectiveness of their deliverables”. Is this enough or should we make the expectation more explicit?

“Question TM1: Should TAB members be able to also be WG chairs? Maybe for the sake of independence, WG Chairs should resign their WG chairmanship if elected to TAB?”
I heard views both ways on this. Please comment.

“Question TM2: Should we try for some sort of balanced representation in the TAB? If so, balanced according to what criteria?”
There was quite a bit of discussion on this – see below

“Question TM3: What should be the number of elected members of TAB? A smaller number makes it easier to achieve consensus but a larger number makes more expertise available. 12 is suggested as a possible number, with 6 being elected in the first round of elections and 6 more in a second round later.”
There seemed to be general agreement with the suggestion in the paper that 12 is a good number for elected members of TAB. But it is probably better to elect all 12 in the first round and introduce the staggering of replacement of half the TAB by some process later.

“Question EP1: What system of voting should be used? Single Vote first past the post, or STV, or other. One motivation might be to have a system which allows the membership to elect a regionally balanced TAB if they wish. For example, if each voter has number of votes, say equal to the number of places being elected, they are more likely to distribute these votes across regions.”
I heard some views in support of the system where each voter has a number of votes equal to the number of seats being elected.

Now back to Question TM2. This is difficult. I think the consensus was that technical expertise should be the main criterion, but that we should also try and achieve some balances in TAB. The question then becomes what factors should we try to balance for and how do we do it.

On what to balance for, the aim could be to make sure that the TAB has the breadth of expertise it needs so disciplinary expertise and technical expertise are two obvious candidates to try to balance. Also as RDA is a global organisation, it seems sensible to try to achieve some degree of balance across geographic regions. On the other hand, personal attributes like gender probably do not need to be balanced.

On how to achieve balance, it seem impossible to ensure that we have representation from every discipline, every technical area and every region, so a system of avoiding over representation in any one area, rather than an achieving minimum representation, may be easier to implement. For example, we could set rules like: no more than one third of the TAB should be from any one continent; or no more than one third of the TAB should be from the same discipline, and so on.

Then we would need a system to achieve this. Candidates would have to declare themselves to be from a particular region and discipline etc, and when the votes were in, the ordered list of top candidates would have to be filtered according to the rules.

All this is very complicated and it may well take some iteration to find the best approach. Please comment with your views or experiences from other organisations. Thank you.
JuanBicarregui
 
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2012 12:58 pm


Return to RDA Discussion Area

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron