1. DMP Common Standards WG
Tomasz Miksa, Paul Walk, Peter Neish
15/01/2019
- @resdatall

2. Challenge – why do we need this WG?
Shortcomings of existing DMPs
manually completed, vague, not updated, …
Machine-actionable DMPs
living documents
automate data management
collect information from systems
trigger actions in systems
facilitate validation
This requires
well-defined RDM workflows
data management infrastructure
common data model
15/01/2019
- @resdatall

3. DMP Common Standards - Outputs
Common data model for machine-actionable DMPs
to model information from standard DMPs
NOT a template
NOT a questionnaire
modular design
core set of elements
domain specific extensions
Reference implementations
ready to use models
JSON, XML, RDF, etc.
Guidelines for adoption of the common data model
requirements for supporting systems
pilot studies
15/01/2019
- @resdatall

4. www.rd-alliance.org - @resdatall
Example
Current DMPs – model questionnaires
<administrative_data>
<question>Who will be the Principle Investigator?</question>
<answer>The PI will be John Smith from our university.</answer>
</administrative_data>
Machine-actionable DMPs – model information
"dc:creator":[ {
"foaf:name":"John Smith",
"madmp:institution":" AT-Vienna-University-of-Technology"
} ],
dc, foaf – reuse existing standards
madmp – create own when needed
AT Vienna – use controled vocabularies when possible or PIDs for instituion
ORCID – use PIDs when possible
15/01/2019
- @resdatall

5. Example Currently available – not very useful Machine-actionable DMP
<administrative_data>
<question>Who will be the Principle Investigator?</question>
<answer>The PI will be John Smith from our university.</answer>
</administrative_data>
Machine-actionable DMP
"dc:creator":[ {
"foaf:name":"John Smith",
"madmp:institution":"AT-Vienna-University-of-Technology"
} ],
Reuse existing standards, e.g. Dublin Core, PREMIS, etc.
dc, foaf – reuse existing standards
madmp – create own when needed
AT Vienna – use controled vocabularies when possible or PIDs for instituion
ORCID – use PIDs when possible
15/01/2019
- @resdatall

6. Example Currently available – not very useful Machine-actionable DMP
<administrative_data>
<question>Who will be the Principle Investigator?</question>
<answer>The PI will be John Smith from our university.</answer>
</administrative_data>
Machine-actionable DMP
"dc:creator":[ {
"foaf:name":"John Smith",
"madmp:institution":"AT-Vienna-University-of-Technology"
} ],
Use PIDs whenever possible, e.g. ORCID
dc, foaf – reuse existing standards
madmp – create own when needed
AT Vienna – use controled vocabularies when possible or PIDs for instituion
ORCID – use PIDs when possible
15/01/2019
- @resdatall

7. Example Currently available – not very useful Machine-actionable DMP
<administrative_data>
<question>Who will be the Principle Investigator?</question>
<answer>The PI will be John Smith from our university.</answer>
</administrative_data>
Machine-actionable DMP
"dc:creator":[ {
"foaf:name":"John Smith",
"madmp:institution":"AT-Vienna-University-of-Technology"
} ],
Use controlled vocabularies
dc, foaf – reuse existing standards
madmp – create own when needed
AT Vienna – use controled vocabularies when possible or PIDs for instituion
ORCID – use PIDs when possible
15/01/2019
- @resdatall

8. Example Currently available – not very useful Machine-actionable DMP
<administrative_data>
<question>Who will be the Principle Investigator?</question>
<answer>The PI will be John Smith from our university.</answer>
</administrative_data>
Machine-actionable DMP
"dc:creator":[ {
"foaf:name":"John Smith",
"madmp:institution":"AT-Vienna-University-of-Technology"
} ],
Develop own concepts and vocabularies only when needed
dc, foaf – reuse existing standards
madmp – create own when needed
AT Vienna – use controled vocabularies when possible or PIDs for instituion
ORCID – use PIDs when possible
15/01/2019
- @resdatall

9. www.rd-alliance.org - @resdatall
Join us now!
We need inputs from all of you!
researchers, infrastructure operators, funders, developers, managers, PhD students, ...
Join our DMP Common Standards WG
Mailing list
GitHub - issue tracker for discussion
Monthly calls
2 time slots – ‘friendly for each time zone’
RDA Europe Workshop in Vienna
15/01/2019
- @resdatall

10. www.rd-alliance.org - @resdatall
Backup slides
15/01/2019
- @resdatall

11. www.rd-alliance.org - @resdatall
Backup slides
15/01/2019
- @resdatall

12. www.rd-alliance.org - @resdatall
The big picture
15/01/2019
- @resdatall

13. www.rd-alliance.org - @resdatall
Next steps
We will
analyse existing systems
analyse existing standards
identify RDM workflows that best use maDMPs
define architecture supporting maDMPs
prototype
run pilot studies
15/01/2019
- @resdatall

14. Milestones and timeline
Requirements and candidate solutions reviewed (M5)
M2. Common model specification drafted (M10)
M3. Common model refined (M15)
M4. Dissemination and pilot studies (M18)
Outputs delivered
Kick-off
Your 18 month timeline places your estimated WG finish date at the end of March This would put your 12-month community report out at P12 in Fall 2018 and your final Recommendations would be presented at P13 in Spring 2019.
10th Plenary
11th Plenary
12th Plenary
13th Plenary
Fall 17
Spring 18
Fall 18
Spring 19
15/01/2019
- @resdatall