2024-05-07 Group work space for national maDMP template

1. Poll for the importance of maDMP principles

Groups:

• maDMP standard - Contact, contributor & cost 
• maDMP standard  - Project, Funding, DMP, Data (Facilitator Juuso Marttila, University of Jyväskylä ) 
• maDMP standard  - Distribution, Licence, Host, DMP, Data (Facilitator Soile Manninen, University of Helsinki)
• maDMP standard - Security & Privacy, Technical resource & Metadata (Facilitator Anna Rohunen, University of Oulu & Johanna Laiho-Kauranne, CSC) - This group will be in English
• maDMP standard - Environment & Biodiversity - Data,  (Facilitator Miika Alonen, CSC)

Work: 

15:00-15:05 General info on group work 

15:05-15:45 RDA DMP Standard assessment in small groups 

• Instructions for the group
  • Each group facilitator opens the concept board and shares it for the group via screen 
    Concept board workspace:  https://app.conceptboard.eu/board/289e-y68k-3yxh-6mzs-bc24
  • Each group assesses the metadata elements assigned to the group
  • Work is done first by discussing the instructions with the group
• Group work:
  • Examine the Entity of the  RDA DMP Standard in the concept board. Discuss whether the elements need further clarification (can be given 5 minutes)
  • Then examine the information model for research project in Finland: (can be given 20 minutes)
    • What other information should be included?
      • Is something vital missing in the RDA DMP Standard?
      • Is something unnecessary and could be left out? 
    • What information should be structural?
    • What information could/should be linked with other information systems?
    • What information could/should be harvested from other information systems?
    • Existing standards, ontologies to be utilised?
    • Add also open comments to standard description to concept board: 
  • Joint discussion about this principle and what are key processes that its update could trigger in machine-actionable DMP? 5 minutes 
• Joint discussion about the entity of standard and are there elements missing or unnecessary? (5 minutes or time allowing)

15:45-16:00 Facilitators report to general discussion

Additional reference and prior reading:
https://github.com/RDA-DMP-Common/RDA-DMP-Common-Standard

https://oblassers.github.io/dmap-mockups/

1. What other information should be included?
2. What should be included in minimum data model? 
3. What information should be structural?
4. What information could/should be linked with other information systems?
5. What information could/should be harvested from other information systems?
6. Existing standards, ontologies to be utilised?

Table below is copied to concept board https://app.conceptboard.com/board/289e-y68k-3yxh-6mzs-bc24# and divided for small groups chaired by Soile Manninen (HY), Juuso Marttila (JY), Anna Rohunen (OY) & Miika Alonen (CSC)

3. Defining national use cases

• Researcher
• PI Researcher
• Research performing organization (RPO)
• Rector of RPO
• Research funding organisation (RFO)
• Internal data stewards, data support and IT
• External research service providers

Examples of use cases identified from the kick-off:

1. Facilitating researchers' everyday work and the automatic flow of information between systems.
2. Enabling automatic actual tracking. Also clarifying ownership, licensing, etc are needed. A lot of useful metadata for description; hopefully GDPR won't get in the way.
3. A tool that guides and guides the researcher more strongly. The best thing would be if sufficient guidance is embedded into the tool. The researcher would be able to answer questions without leaving the tool, for example. E.g. when needed to visit the university's website for more information.
4. A tool that allows DMP data to be utilized more extensively within organizations.
5. Opportunities to make more efficient use of the data content of DMPs at the organizational level, e.g. timely support and service provision for researchers or the implementation of statutory and Privacy by Design processes.