[Go-essp-tech] Access control for data with different QC Level

[Karl Taylor]

Dear all,

I should have said "The other 1% of the *research articles* will use 
data that is based on output that has not be replicated or assigned 
DOI's.  This data is still of substantial scientific interest ..."    
The non-replicated data volume will be similar or larger than the 
replicated data volume.

Karl

On 7/20/10 10:24 AM, Karl Taylor wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> We clearly need to get clarification/guidance from the modeling groups.
> I must say, however, that I'm guessing that the DOI assignment will
> cover data published  in 99% of the research articles.  The other 1% of
> the data is still of considerable research value (just as all the CMIP3
> data was valuable, even without DOI's).   This "other" data should *not*
> be excluded from research (and journal publication).  Given that there
> seem to be limits to what can be accommodated in the "replicated" subset
> (which is what is destined for DOI assignment), I see no reason to
> modify what I said earlier other than:
>
> We should add a line to the terms of use that when data is used in a
> research publication, the user must follow the rules for citation and
> acknowledgment that will be found on our website.  One of these rules
> will be that if a DOI has been assigned to the data, then it must be cited.
>
> We will have to get the modeling groups to agree to this, but, like
> Balaji, I think they will be in favor.
>
> Best regards,
> Karl
>
> On 7/20/10 10:00 AM, V. Balaji wrote:
>    
>> Karl, I must disagree. I think the principle that the modeling centers
>> deserve acknowledgment from users of the data in the form of a citation
>> has to be a bedrock requirement, and I thought the WGCM leadership
>> understood and agreed.
>>
>> I agree that the WGCM may not have a position on QC and versioning per
>> se, but they are necessary steps for a robust citation system, as the
>> Michael et al document shows. The WGCM must take a stand on citations.
>> If they do the rest follows.
>>
>> I apologize if I am being hasty and misunderstood your remark, as
>> I'm rushing off to the next damn thing... (It's one of those "one
>> damn thing after another" days...)
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Karl Taylor writes:
>>
>>
>>      
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Hold the presses please!
>>>
>>> My understanding is that WGCM expects *all* output registered with ESG to be
>>> made available to anyone who signs the terms of use, as soon as the output is
>>> available (with perhaps a requirement that model documentation also be in
>>> place).  There are no requirements for QC or replication placed on the
>>> output.  [There aren't even any expectations that "versioning" be
>>> implemented, although I think they will be pleased if it is.]  This is a
>>> simple requirement, which should be easy for us to meet.
>>>
>>> It would, of course, be helpful for us to include information to users
>>> concerning what QC checks have been performed, but that is not part of the
>>> requirement, as I understand it.
>>>
>>> I'll try to respond in more detail later today.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Karl
>>>
>>> On 7/20/10 9:05 AM, Bryan Lawrence wrote:
>>>
>>>        
>>>> Hi Balaji
>>>>
>>>> On Tuesday 20 July 2010 16:39:26 V. Balaji wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>          
>>>>> Bryan, overall I agree with you both about the content of the tokens
>>>>> and the machinery for delivering and using tokens.
>>>>>
>>>>> Small clarification, when you say
>>>>>
>>>>> Bryan Lawrence writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>            
>>>>>> However, as it stands, we can't give a DOI to output which is not
>>>>>> replicated, but people will need to use it. I *do* think it's ok to
>>>>>> restrict this to modellers (despite Martin's point about what PCMDI
>>>>>> are advertising). I think most of the non-modelling community will
>>>>>> be happy with the replicated data ...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>              
>>>>> Is "modellers" supposed to mean IPCC-WG1? I think so.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>            
>>>> Yes!  Sorry, lazy language.
>>>>
>>>> Bryan
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>          
>>
>>      
> _______________________________________________
> GO-ESSP-TECH mailing list
> GO-ESSP-TECH at ucar.edu
> http://*mailman.ucar.edu/mailman/listinfo/go-essp-tech
>
>