[Seavox] Fwd: RE: Data Access Policy Vocabulary

Fri Nov 17 11:28:10 GMT 2006

Dear All,

Another response from Julie below (Julie try the list again - I could see no problem)  is defending the idea of extra terms for 'at cost of collection' and for 'data available as part of a synthesis'.  Whilst I can maybe live with the extra cost type, I am uncomfortable with adding the synthesis term for two reasons:

I see even 'on the fly' syntheses as a separate dataset to their base data.
I see this as a specific licence condition (I would lable the base data licence, not restricted) and fear that it will open the door to a whole raft of detailed condition terms, whereas broad indicators are the objective.  I'm even starting to feel that maybe charges are a type of licence and shouldn't be separated out.

Anybody else got any thoughts?

Cheers, Roy.

>>> "Julie Gillin" <julie at ices.dk> 11/16/2006 8:36 am >>>
Hi Roy !
Thanks for fixing my enlistment. Please forward this. 

While I appreciate your comments to (1), the problem remains that data
always is seen only as "Restricted" since syntheses are often produced
on the fly and thus their unrestricted access is implicit. 

Regarding (2): the supply-side cost model is actually suspected of being
a tactic to inflate data prices to an unattainable level. Thus, I would
like to see two separate types of cost models.

Kr
Julie

-----Original Message-----
From: seavox-bounces at biwebs1.nerc-liv.ac.uk 
[mailto:seavox-bounces at biwebs1.nerc-liv.ac.uk] On Behalf Of Roy Lowry
Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2006 9:23 AM
To: seavox at biwebs1-2.nerc-liv.ac.uk 
Subject: [Seavox] Fwd: RE: Data Access Policy Vocabulary

Hi Julie,

Something strange happened to your message - I got it through the
mailman 'bounce' mechanism so I include it below for the rest of the
list members to see.  I'll also check out your membership details.

In answer to (1) I would argue that we are producing labels for datasets
and that the base data constitutes a separate dataset from the synthesis
carrying separate discovery metadata.  Thus the raw data could be
labelled 'restricted' and the synthesis 'unrestricted'.

In answer to (2) I would propose making  the definition of 'at cost'
broader.  What I'm trying to descriminiate between is the affordable and
the extortionate!

Cheers, Roy.

>>> "Julie Gillin" <julie at ices.dk> 11/16/2006 8:10 am >>>
Dear Roy et al,

The list is a good start - I also agree with John's comments below.

However, I foresee at least two situations not covered:
1) Data released only in aggregated or anonymized or otherwise processed
form (to protect sources, economic interests, etc.)
2) Data delivered at cost to deliver + cost to collect (this model has
in fact been suggested in some discussions on the Data Collection
Regulation). This is thus supply-side-set, and thus not the same as
"charged at commercial rate" which is presumeably demand-side driven. 

Sincerely,
Julie

-----Original Message-----
From: seavox-bounces at biwebs1.nerc-liv.ac.uk 
[mailto:seavox-bounces at biwebs1.nerc-liv.ac.uk] On Behalf Of John
Graybeal
Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2006 5:43 PM
To: Roy Lowry
Cc: seavox at biwebs1-2.nerc-liv.ac.uk 
Subject: Re: [Seavox] Data Access Policy Vocabulary

Roy,

Nice list, I will have to figure out how MMI can keep up with all the
vocabularies you're creating!

Some minor notes are below.  (I appreciate I'm not central to your
project, please feel free to ignore or otherwise adjust these inputs to
meet your goals.)

1) Another reason for a moratorium is pending validation (QC) of the
data. Perhaps this should be explicitly added to this item, or maybe it
results in a different category.

2) The phrase "However a correct value probably exists" raises the
question, what if it doesn't?  Do you want an additional category "not
defined" (the policy has not yet been set)?  Or maybe the phrase is not
needed.

3) Splitting hairs even further, if my data is freely available to
anyone but I would like acknowledgment, which of the categories
'unrestricted' and 'academic' is correct?  (I think you're combining "to
whom data is made available" and "is acknowledgement required", so this
is an ambiguous case.)

I note that this list conflates two concepts, cost and availability.
Ideally they would be separated.  As a practical matter it may not be
important in your context.

John

At 3:37 PM +0000 11/15/06, Roy Lowry wrote:
>Dear All,
>
>Attached is a vocabulary designed to fulfil the function of the
ISO19115 MD_RestrictionCode vocabulary for our more academic world. The
vocabulary has been built from two sources, the SEA-SEARCH CDI (a simple
subset of MD_RestrictionCode) and the EDIOS metadatabase, which has a
much bigger vocabulary that I've tried to distil down (see the EDIOS
sheet in the XLS file for the gory details, including the kind of  terms
you get in vocabularies built without governance e.g. 'see website').
>
>What I'm trying to achieve through this vocabulary is to provide the
discoverer of a dataset with a reasonably clear picture of the hoops
that need to be negotiated to get hold of the dataset.  Guess its really
a classification of data access policies.  Let me have any comments.
>
>Cheers, Roy.
>
>Attachment converted: Macintosh HD:SeaDataNet_Vocab_L081.xls
>(XLS4/<IC>) (0159338E) _______________________________________________
>Seavox mailing list
>Seavox at mailman.nerc-liv.ac.uk 
>http://mailman.nerc-liv.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/seavox 

--
----------
John Graybeal   <mailto:graybeal at mbari.org>  -- 831-775-1956
Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute
Marine Metadata Initiative: http://marinemetadata.org   ||  Shore Side
Data System: http://www.mbari.org/ssds 

_______________________________________________
Seavox mailing list
Seavox at mailman.nerc-liv.ac.uk 
http://mailman.nerc-liv.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/seavox 
************************************************************************
****
Denne mail er blevet scannet af http://www.virus112.com 
************************************************************************
****

************************************************************************
****
Denne mail er blevet scannet af http://www.virus112.com 
************************************************************************
****