[tdwg-humboldt] ALA data team feedback

Wed Oct 25 01:00:48 UTC 2023

Hi everyone

Thanks for the nice feedback on our feedback!!

There is no need for this work to seek "compatibility" with the ALA systems. That's not what we were seeking in our feedback, although we were trying to explain where we were coming from. Our Extended Data system implementation is essentially Event Core. It's most important that the Humboldt extension stick to the DwC core-extension standard, and I can't really see any allowances necessarily need to be made for us. I don't believe we've suggested anything that breaks the standard, or even any fields that introduce new information.

Rob, re your suggestion of a case study. We have mapped Australian eBird data to Event Core for our events system, so hold onto your hats for its release by the end of the year. I understand that eBird has been contributing to the group, so perhaps we could look at using some eBird examples. The suggestions we've made have not been for extra data that needs to be mapped somewhere but are around restructuring the fields and hierarchies so that hopefully the data is cleaner and more flexible. Theoretically we should just be able to manipulate data in an existing case study.

Cheers
Peggy

________________________________
From: tdwg-humboldt <tdwg-humboldt-bounces at lists.tdwg.org> on behalf of Rob Stevenson <rdstevenson10 at gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, October 20, 2023 11:21 PM
To: Humboldt Core TG <tdwg-humboldt at lists.tdwg.org>
Cc: Robert Guralnick <robgur at gmail.com>; Wesley M. Hochachka <wmh6 at cornell.edu>; Kate Ingenloff <kingenloff at gbif.org>
Subject: Re: [tdwg-humboldt] ALA data team feedback

HI All

I am not sure how others feel, but I think of  ALA as a leader in the challenges that the extension faces because of the diversity of data types ALA aggregates. If the extension does a good job of supporting what ALA is already doing, then that will help ensure the chances of successfully capturing survey/inventory data in all of their complexity

My suggestion would be to have Peggy, along with Peter of course, join us and share a case study from the ALA that best illustrates the main points the ALA review has raised.

Thoughts from others, especially Peter....

Best, Rob

On Fri, Oct 20, 2023 at 6:08 AM Kate Ingenloff <kathryn.ingenloff at gmail.com<mailto:kathryn.ingenloff at gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi All,

I've only had a chance to take a quick look at the responses provided by Peggy and the ALA team, but thus far the feedback seems great! It's really good to have these very clear and precise thoughts. Thank you, Peggy, to you and your crew. :)

I will start going through this in greater detail and add to the GH. I will link the relevant GH issue to each issue in the document so the progress is obvious (and can be corrected if others feel that there's a more appropriate route for addressing the comment).

@Yi Ming Gan<mailto:ymgan at naturalsciences.be>, I'm not seeing your comments on the document.

Cheers,
Kate

On Fri, Oct 20, 2023 at 1:24 AM Dmitry Schigel <dschigel at gbif.org<mailto:dschigel at gbif.org>> wrote:

Sounds reasonable, and we can / should treat ALA and iDIV feedback as public review issues (now with new DL). It would probably help Steve and others if the ALA report is indeed sliced into GH issues that can be handled one by one. @Kate Ingenloff<mailto:kingenloff at gbif.org> – unless someone else volunteers, could you perhaps take care of this? This would not only improve issue management, but also archive suggestions and concerns in the same space for the public review process.

I am back to office on Tuesday and hope to meet with Kate soon after to see how we can further help the process.

I had very rich discussion at TDWG and GBIF days here in Australia, and it is important that any potential incompatibilities with ALA are resolved, as ALA is one of our best chances to champion Humboldt here down under, and same for iDIV in continental Europe. It actually sounds like we might be able to process both reports and maybe complete the examples in November… Also GBIF work programme 2024 is just approved, giving us green light on focusing on ecology data streams = Humboldt, and ratification is an enabling factor GBIF to coordinate the rollout.

As promised, I will also speak to Joe about the guide-finishing contract and possible budget for that in a bout week from now.

@Robert Guralnick<mailto:robgur at gmail.com>, GBIF Science committee is supportive of the guide + paper approach, we should coordinate how completion of the guide (hopefully c/o GBIFS) and Humboldt paper 2.0 (which I understood you agreed to lead-write) work together (overlaps, lengths, links, timelines etc).

The list of target conferences to market the extension (+guide, + paper) is also becoming clearer for 2024 and 2025.

BR

Dmitry

From: tdwg-humboldt <tdwg-humboldt-bounces at lists.tdwg.org<mailto:tdwg-humboldt-bounces at lists.tdwg.org>> On Behalf Of John Wieczorek
Sent: Thursday, 19 October, 2023 00:31
To: Humboldt Core TG <tdwg-humboldt at lists.tdwg.org<mailto:tdwg-humboldt at lists.tdwg.org>>; Wesley M. Hochachka <wmh6 at cornell.edu<mailto:wmh6 at cornell.edu>>
Subject: Re: [tdwg-humboldt] ALA data team feedback

Dear all,

In our meeting today we discussed that the time requirement for the public comment to Humboldt has now been met without any outstanding issues, but we did not have any time to review the document shared here. Independent of that document we agreed that we would keep the public review open at least until Ani has had a chance to corral her iDiv audience and discuss the extension live and in person.

We also discussed the remaining promised Task Group task of mapping additional data sets to get to the total of seven. As that was a proposed output of the Task Group, it doesn't affect the term ratification process, and is open to justification to the Executive committee if not all seven are actually delivered. If we can though, great, and the timeline for doing so only really affects the disbanding of the Task Group. Since we will wait at least two weeks for the iDiv feedback and we need to assess this document from Peggy and add issues to the issue tracker as appropriate, we are likely looking at at least another 30 days of public comments from the time that is done anyway.

So the big task for next week is to discuss the ALA report, and even before then, if possible, get any clear issue into the Humboldt Extension issue tracker (https://github.com/tdwg/hc/issues).

Cheers,

John

On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 8:55 AM ys628 <yanina.sica at yale.edu<mailto:yanina.sica at yale.edu>> wrote:

Dear Peggy,

Thank you so much for the detailed revision and for sharing your feedback with us.

This is very useful for us particularly because the issues you found are clearly described and justified, I really appreciate this.

We have a meeting today (which unfortunately I cannot assist) but I would ask the group to start revising your feedback.

I uploaded the document<https://docs.google.com/file/d/1OxJ_H5vBd9pucjdgQDa6qMaQKl4O89gf/edit?usp=docslist_api&filetype=msword> to our shared Drive so we can start adding our comments in response to your findings.

After internally discussing your feedback, I will reach out to you and invite you to join our meetings so we can find a solution.

Thank you again and I am glad you find the Humbold a useful addition!

Best,

Yanina Sica

Yanina V. Sica, PhD

Lead Data Team

Map of Life<https://mol.org/> | Center for Biodiversity and Global Change<https://bgc.yale.edu/>

Yale University

pronouns: she/her/hers

If you are receiving this email outside of your working hours, I am not expecting you to read or respond

________________________________

From: tdwg-humboldt <tdwg-humboldt-bounces at lists.tdwg.org<mailto:tdwg-humboldt-bounces at lists.tdwg.org>> on behalf of Newman, Peggy (NCMI, Clayton) <Peggy.Newman at csiro.au<mailto:Peggy.Newman at csiro.au>>
Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2023 6:42:28 AM
To: tdwg-humboldt at lists.tdwg.org<mailto:tdwg-humboldt at lists.tdwg.org> <tdwg-humboldt at lists.tdwg.org<mailto:tdwg-humboldt at lists.tdwg.org>>
Subject: [tdwg-humboldt] ALA data team feedback

Greetings Team Humboldt!

It was sure nice to catch up with some of you over the past weeks.

I have a document that we’ve put together with our suggestions for the extension. Our team had two discussions about it, and Doug wrote up our conclusions in a 2 pager word doc.

So I’ve tried to attach them here, but don’t know how the listserv will cope with a document.  Let’s see.

In any case, how is best to proceed from here? Let us know if you’d like to talk in person I guess.

Cheers

Peggy

_______________________________________________
tdwg-humboldt mailing list
tdwg-humboldt at lists.tdwg.org<mailto:tdwg-humboldt at lists.tdwg.org>
https://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-humboldt

_______________________________________________
tdwg-humboldt mailing list
tdwg-humboldt at lists.tdwg.org<mailto:tdwg-humboldt at lists.tdwg.org>
https://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-humboldt

--
------------------------------
Kate Ingenloff, PhD
Pronouns: she/her(s)
(+45) 51 44 13 23

"When one tugs at a single thread in nature, he finds it attached to the rest of the world." ~John Muir
_______________________________________________
tdwg-humboldt mailing list
tdwg-humboldt at lists.tdwg.org<mailto:tdwg-humboldt at lists.tdwg.org>
https://lists.tdwg.org/mailman/listinfo/tdwg-humboldt

--
Robert D Stevenson
Associate Professor
Department of Biology
UMass Boston
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.tdwg.org/pipermail/tdwg-humboldt/attachments/20231025/b5e60c2c/attachment-0001.html>