Page Comparison

ATTENDEES: Wendy, Jon, Darren, Dan, Jeremy

Web pages -

General:

• Want to control the website and not have it jobbed out

• There is static content that could be usable but not necessarily optimal

• Get it over and done and implemented and then think of the redesign

• Need to get basics done first (lift and shift)

• Opportunity to move to keep it simple then talk to groups involved (Training, TC, Publications)

Products:

• Putting up stuff around infrastructure and pipelines

• Top level URLs for the products will be hard coded or redirected

• If CDI has specific requirements they need to write them down

• This seems the obvious stuff to write this down

Document site:

• Timing of when we are going to split the document move to doc site

• Identification of documents should be part of the new site map

• Do we retain the static pages as just the publications and say the docs are over there (old docs)

• A page for product on the site but all in-depth documentation on the doc site

• Useful to have a profile of what goes on the doc site for future additions and help to groups in identifying what goes where

ACTION ITEMS:

• Darren and Jon will draft up a basic skeleton of the site map to kick against

• Add to next weeks agenda

• Known static content changes should be made before TC f-to-f meeting (ACTION: Wendy)

TC report to SB
Comments noted on draft

Update on current review work
I will continue to send reminders to reviews of both products during the review period

• Glossary List

  • Review underway

  • Several volunteers from Training Committee

• DDI-CDI Production:

  • Plans for sustainability of the standard; once its done in EA what is the pipeline (Jon will relook at the documents)

  • Olof - JSON

  • Pascal will begin in early June, may need extension

  • Dan - RDF output, looking primarily to see how they were transforming UML into RDF; special semantic relationships like traces in UML to identify patterns - how is this translated to canonical UML and then to syntaxes (are these just there to support their development of the model? this should be clarified)

Codebook (please look at before next week)

DDICODE-93 License - more detailed values for type attribute
DDICODE-95

ATTENDEES: Wendy, Jon, Oliver, Dan, Jeremy, Flavio, Christophe, Olof
APOLOGIES: Darren

Scientific Board Strategic Plan

[note Flavio and Dan are elected members on the SB. Wendy is ex-officio]
Flavio noted a couple of issues he'd already added
"horizon scanning capability"
"more robust" more of a clear source of truth

1.4 W3C and explore - RDF representation preparation in 2024 - why would we want to give away the variable cascade to another organization
Increase visibility, not "give away" needs to be more explicit

1.6 no date so when is this supposed to be worked on? non-open source like Colectica - what does it mean? The notion that we are working with commercial vendors and make no mention of those we currently work with. What exactly are we trying to develop? Work with related software (analysis tools) regarding input/output support?

2.2 we don't have an activity defined as such, what is in 2024? Clarify what this is mean here? architecture of content or of repository. Starting when?

2.3 addition of SDMX and HLG to this group specifically or as part of whole DDI interoperability. What do we mean by this in terms of organizational level?

2.4 The example is about domains not geographies but domain areas. Awkward, examples do not relate to geographies.

2.5 Progress toward ISO certification (we started, why is this 2025? What is meant by progress. More details - contact continuation, paperwork,

GENERAL: of strategic plan to prioritize and focus work on specific areas. Concern there is too much for too many. Who is going to do this.

3.1 TC is working on in terms of organizing documents and publication

3.2 difference between 3.2 and 3.4?
Maybe some collapse into a broader infrastructure for development, management, presentation

GENERAL: Verbiage is abstract making it difficult to differentiate and make sure that different aspects are identified as sub-bullets

Omitted support of DDI Codebook 2.6

3.8 don't understand what this means (modularity within a product), but between products? Why is the example is a provenance model.

Discussion on user mailing list (conceptual, and reference variable) was the actual issue we would face with 3.8. things differ between products and there are different implementations in various products. Need for metamodel to understand what is found in multiple products, but varying implementation. Example of metamodels (Groups).

Need both metamodel to understand differences, and in some areas a single mullti-use content.

Suggestions in the scientific model that haven't been discussed. They seem to be arising from a minimum number of sources

"Let's do a provenance model" opens up a can of worms. No background discussion. There is a process raising topical rears and pursuing their development across products in one way or another.

HOLES?: Lack of content regarding how to use DDI suite together. (maybe related to 2.6) maybe expand to include 2024?

ACTION:

• Wendy will add notes to document

• Start list of content for report, next year priorities for TC; send out to get comments before next week

ATTENDEES: Wendy, Jon, Darren, Dan, Christophe, Jeremy
APOLOGIES: Flavio, Oliver

Newsletter submission
Thank you for XKOS work on publication process
Alert people to recording on Lifecycle 4.0 BETA and continuing work

TC report to Scientific Board
Web page support through AWL
Infrastructure
Codebook
CDI review
4.0 BETA continue to finalization

Glossary Group document publication
TC to look at in terms of technical review
Check in Glossary that its DDI
Hayley get a few Training people to look at
Christophe will talk with INSEE folks regarding clarity
Month deadline

Glossary work

DDI Lifecycle github issue
https://github.com/ddialliance/ddimodel/issues/38

Rather than think of the specific item raised here
What is the purpose of the represented variable
If its available it should be in represented variable
there is a difference between practical use cases which might not be the dominant ones
Issue is primarily around missing values and problems of how coding or options change from capture through processing to instance and physical store differences
Currently clear change from represented to instance is going from universe to population (spatial temporal specifications)
Different sorts of data throw up different problems
One of the strengths of the schema it is quite directional (this can also)

ACTION: Wendy enter this discussion on #38 (DONE); others should add comments on role of RepresentedVariable or other points as needed

NEWS:
Guillaume is returning come September