Agenda

Monday, October 17, 2016

Morning

Session 1 (plenary):  Introductions, goals of the workshop, and overall introduction to DDI

Introduction of participants

Introduction to DDI

• DDI-Codebook
• DDI-Lifecycle
• DDI Moving Forward Project
• What do we work with and the challenges that we’ve encountered, especially regarding interoperability with other specifications

Session 2 (plenary): Presentations from external experts on specific specifications or usage of specifications.

External presentations:

• Klas Blomqvist – GSIM
• Flavio Rizzolo – LIM
• Arofan Gregory – SDMX
• Eric Prud’hommeaux – FHIR
• Barrie Nelson - CDISC

Afternoon

Session 3 (plenary): Presentations from external experts on specific specifications or usage of specifications.

External presentations:

• Nick Car –  PROV
• Gregg Kellogg – CSVW
• Gary Berg-Cross – RDA & Ontologies
• Daniella Meeker –  standards in biomedical research
• Darren Bell – UKDA’s use of DDI in Big Data

Session 4 (plenary): Discussion of interoperability

Interoperability

• Presentation by Wendy Thomas
• Begin discussion towards an agreed definition of interoperability

Evening:

Possible evening session - Topic to be determined

Tuesday, October 18, 2016

Morning

Session 1 (plenary): Discussion of interoperability

• Ensure we have an agreed upon definition of Interoperability
• Begin discussion of business scenarios
  • • Short presentations of requested business scenarios (Jay, Eric, Jon, Barry)
    • Collection of business scenarios

Session 2 (working groups):

Session 2A:  Business scenario:  Situations where we would use different standards together

• Outcome: Document outlining these business scenarios
• Description of the Business Scenario in a consistent way 
• Agree on a set of functionalities across the specifications
• List of requirements 

Session 2B:  Common Aspects of all specifications present during Data Description

• Outcome: 2 tables:
  • High level table demonstrating what specs are used for specific aspects of … see Arofan’s table
  • Detailed table mapping the important properties and relationships within classes, terminology differences, identify significant differences

Afternoon

Session 3 (working groups):

Session 3A:  Provenance of data, metadata

• Common understanding of what provenance is
• What are the requirements of provenance
• Overview of real life provenance applications

Outcome: A common definition / understanding of provenance for the purpose of this workshop

• • Discussion of provenance
  • Real life examples
  • Shared and agreed definition of provenance

Session 3B:  Design patterns 

• Review of practical use in DDI 4
• Generic principles, what is the right balance between clean structure on the model level and understandable use on the binding level
• Pros/cons on model level, binding level

Outcome:  document outlining:

• • Evaluation of current design patterns in DDI4
  • What can we learn from the other specifications
  • Reason for pattern use and style of pattern
    
    

Session 4 (working groups):

Session 3A continued: Provenance of data, metadata

Session 3B continued:  Design patterns

Evening:

Possible evening session - Topic to be determined

Wednesday, October 19, 2016

Morning

Session 1 (working groups):

Session 1A:  Bindings of DDI, CDISC, HL7/FHIR, SDMX, GSIM, CSV on the Web

• Approaches of modeling and/or generation

• Usage of other vocabularies
• The process you use to create your specifications
  
  Outcome:  document outlining  why other specs have chosen their particular bindings, the process used to create them, their rationale, and approaches to new releases and versioning; how to deal with issues of identification and round-tripping of data and metadata

Session 1B:  Operations (Protocols)  with specifications, i.e. REST with DDI, CDISC, HL7/FHIR, SDMX, GSIM, CSV on the Web (Part 1)

• Goal is to find a generic way of operations to support combined usage of specifications
• Requirements from a user’s perspective

Outcome:  document contrasting the approaches used to interchange protocols (REST, SPARQL, SOAP, etc..) by the different specifications; Proc and cons of having standard interfaces as part of the specification and the rationale

Session 2 (working groups):

Session 1A continued:  Bindings of DDI, CDISC, HL7/FHIR, SDMX, GSIM, CSV on the Web 

Session 1B continued:  Operations (Protocols)  with specifications, i.e. REST with DDI, CDISC, HL7/FHIR, SDMX, GSIM, CSV on the Web

Session 2 (plenary): 

Discussion – to determine if there is a consensus view of which bindings/protocols should be used; what does this picture look like?  (Current and future perspective - possible developments)

Afternoon

Session 3 (working groups):

Session 3A:  Provenance of data/metadata  (Data production)

• Relationship of stages of the data life cycle
• Relationship of tasks in GSBPM/GLBPM, other process models
• Relationship of aggregate data to underlying microdata – description of processing

How to record provenance; Can PROV-O describe other process models such as GSBPM/GLBPM?  How can the ideas of PROV-O be used in non-RDF bindings? 

 Outcome: 

• • Quick presentation to the larger group on discussion and findings
  • Document from presentation to be used in joint doc

Session 3B:  Provenance of data/metadata – RDF  (Data publication)

• Usage of W3C PROV-O in DDI 4 RDF and other specs with RDF bindings
• How do we capture sufficient information around provenance and processing?

Goal: best practice for using PROV-O with other Specs

 Outcome: 

• • Quick presentation to the larger group on discussion and findings
  • Document from presentation to be used in joint doc

Session 4 (plenary):

Plenary session for groups to report back to exchange findings and open discussion

 Outcome:  Extension of provenance definition document to include:

• • Data production discussion
  • Data publication discussion

Evening:

Possible evening session - Topic to be determined

Thursday, October 20, 2016

Morning

Session 1 (working groups):

Session 1A:  RDF bindings for statistical data and metadata

• Discuss requirements for RDF applications that deal specifically with statistical data
• What are the best RDF vocabularies for data and metadata description?
• Specific best practice for using multiple vocabularies for this purpose

Outcome: document describing the requirements and best practices for use of RDF vocabularies in statistical applications

Session 1B:  Data description, general mapping table of multiple specifications with equal and similar items 

• Commonalities across DDI, CDISC, HL7/FHIR, SDMX, GSIM, CSVW - data description aspect
• More detailed discussion as follow-up to Tuesday’s discussion
• Opportunity for folks not involved on Tuesday to participate

Outcome: document outlining the relationship of different standards for data description

Session 2 (working groups):

Session 1A continued:  RDF bindings for statistical data and metadata

Session 1B continued:  Data description, general mapping table of multiple specifications with equal and similar items

Afternoon

3^rd Session (plenary):

Session 3A:  DD-R package

• discuss and document program for moving forward on a Data Description package in R

Session 3B:  RESTful

• Discuss and document information for moving forward on a collaborative RESTful 

4^th Session (working groups):

Session 4A:  RDF Bindings and Production framework with Elisa Kendall - via remote

Session 3A continued:  DD-R Package

Session 3B continued:  RESTful

Friday, October 21, 2016

Morning

1^st Session (working groups):

Session 1A:  Start the conversation for future collaboration – create a small working group to work out the details

• Multiple specs use case – work in the future?
• Think about active proposals for future collaboration

Session 1B:  Statement of design principles to be agreed by specs represented (Data Manifesto)

• How do we make available?
• How/where do we publish?

 Outcome:

The outline and draft of agreed design principles (“Data Manifesto”)

• Documentation of work

2^nd Session:

Afternoon

3^rd Session (plenary):

• Communication and sustainability