From eotuama at gbif.org  Fri Nov  7 07:35:18 2014
From: eotuama at gbif.org (=?iso-8859-1?Q?=C9amonn_=D3_Tuama_=5BGBIF=5D?=)
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2014 16:35:18 +0100
Subject: [eml-dev] machine readable licenses in EML
Message-ID: <014001cffaa0$6f2aa1d0$4d7fe570$@org>

Is it possible to use the EML fields "license" and "licenseURL" for
resources other than software, e.g., the actual dataset being described in
the metadata? The license fields are part of the eml-software module which
by definition "contains general information that describes software
resources" and is "intended to fully document software that is needed in
order to view a resource ...".

 

Setting aside the issue of whether datasets (as collection of facts rather
than creative works) can actually be licensed, we want to capture
machine-readable licence information.

 

Presently, we are considering use of the intellectualRights for the GBIF EML
profile to capture licence information: 

<intellectualRights>

<para>This work is licensed under a <ulink
url="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode"><citetitle>Creati
ve Commons Attribution (CC-BY) 4.0 License</citetitle></ulink>.</para>

</intellectualRights>

 

But just being able to use something like this would be cleaner:

 

<eml:eml>

...

<dataset>

<license>CC0 1.0 Universal (CC0 1.0) Public Domain Dedication </license>

<licenseURL>http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/</licenseURL>

</dataset> 

...

</eml:dataset>

 

____________________________________________________

?amonn ? Tuama, M.Sc., Ph.D. (eotuama at gbif.org), 

Senior Programme Officer for Interoperability, 

Global Biodiversity Information Facility Secretariat, 

Universitetsparken 15, DK-2100, Copenhagen ?, DENMARK

Phone:  +45 3532 1494; Fax:  +45 3532 1480

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nceas.ucsb.edu/ecoinformatics/pipermail/eml-dev/attachments/20141107/bd84d12c/attachment.html>

From leinfelder at nceas.ucsb.edu  Wed Nov 12 12:51:05 2014
From: leinfelder at nceas.ucsb.edu (Benjamin Leinfelder)
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2014 12:51:05 -0800
Subject: [eml-dev] Morpho 1.10.3 Released
Message-ID: <419D3373-E6B7-4474-BFB0-63237E0E8E7A@nceas.ucsb.edu>

Dear Morpho users,
We are pleased to announce the release of a new version of our metadata management software. We encourage you to review the release notes and upgrade at your convenience.

This Morpho 1.10.3 release adds the ability to export datapackage metadata as a PDF document. Additionally, new profiles can easily be created for accounts that are managed outside of the "ecoinformatics.org" domain.

Morpho downloads can be accessed from the main KNB site, https://knb.ecoinformatics.org/

As always, we welcome any feedback - good or bad - on this application and encourage you to contact us and/or submit feature requests to our issue tracking system, https://projects.ecoinformatics.org/ecoinfo/

Thank you,
Ben Leinfelder
NCEAS Ecoinformatics Team

Morpho 1.10.3
--------------------
This release includes the following enhancements:
	-Support LDAP accounts outside of dc=ecoinformatics,dc=org domain.
	-Include PDF rendering of metadata with data package exports.

From christy.geromboux at anu.edu.au  Thu Nov 13 17:38:53 2014
From: christy.geromboux at anu.edu.au (Christy Lee. Geromboux)
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2014 01:38:53 +0000
Subject: [eml-dev] Question about eml personnel
Message-ID: <8d747fb14b914858aa2e9a3200c23243@SINPR06MB204.apcprd06.prod.outlook.com>

Hi,

I am new to the LTERN data team, and am trying to get my head around EML. I was hoping to gain some understanding around where various personnel ought to be acknowledged. Specifically the differentiation between dataset creators, dataset owners, project personnel, and funding bodies that require citation. I have tried to illustrate my question with a fictitious example in blue, and where I have copied the relevant EML documentation I have used purple.

We have many data sets that fall under various umbrella projects (which we call Plot Networks).
For example there a Project:
Three Parks Savanna Plot Network

There are many data sets have been produced as part of this project.
For example:
Three Parks Savanna Plot Network: Dataset 1
Three Parks Savanna Plot Network: Dataset 2

We have situations where the Plot Network leader (i.e. guy who signs the data deeds), is not the same person who created the data set, and does not require citation. But we need to acknowledge that he is the leader of the project and therefore has final say regarding all datasets that belong to this project.

So in the above example:
Bob is the plot leader for Three Parks Savanna Fire-effects Plot Network
But:
John is the data set creator for the package Three Parks Savanna Plot Network: Dataset 1
Bob is the data set creator for the package Three Parks Savanna Plot Network: Dataset 2
Also:
                OrganisationA is a funding body for the entire Plot Network and therefore requires citation for all datasets in this project.

As I understand:

1.       The eml-project <personnel> tag can be used for the owner of the Plot Network (i.e. Bob), and we can give him/her a role of "Owner". The relevant EML documentation from  is below:
2.4.5. The eml-project module - Research context information for resources
The eml-project module describes the research context in which the dataset was created, including descriptions of over-all motivations and goals, funding, personnel, description of the study area etc. This is also the module to describe the design of the project: the scientific questions being asked, the architecture of the design, etc. This module is used to place the dataset that is being documented into its larger research context.

personnel
This element has no default value.
Content of this field:      Description of this field:
Derived from: rp:ResponsibleParty (by xs:extension)

The Personnel field extends ResponsibleParty with role information and is used to document people involved in a research project by providing contact information and their role in the project. A project must have at least one originator.

role
The role field contains information about role a person plays in a research project. There are a number of suggested roles, however, it is possible to add a role if the suggested roles are not adequate.
Example(s):
author
contentProvider
custodianSteward
distributor
editor
metadataProvider
originator
owner
...


2.       Where as the <creator> tag in the eml-dataset module would contain the people and organisations that make up the citation for the dataset (either Bob or John, as well as OrganisationA). See EML documentation below:

creator
This element has no default value.
Content of this field:      Description of this field:
Type: rp:ResponsibleParty
The 'creator' element provides the full name of the person, organization, or position who created the resource. The list of creators for a resource represent the people and organizations who should be cited for the resource.

So citations would include:
John and OrganisationA. Three Parks Savanna Plot Network: Dataset 1
Bob and OrganisationA. Three Parks Savanna Plot Network: Dataset 2

And the Project personnel for both of these datasets would list Bob with a role of Owner.

Have I got the correct understanding? Hopefully this all makes sense!

Regards,


Christy Geromboux
Data Curator
The Fenner School of Environment and Society ANU
College of Medicine, Biology & Environment
Fenner Building 141,
The Australian National University ACT 0200
Australia
T: + 61 2 6125 5580
christy.geromboux at anu.edu.au<mailto:christy.geromboux at anu.edu.au>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nceas.ucsb.edu/ecoinformatics/pipermail/eml-dev/attachments/20141114/1ea1f8b0/attachment.html>

From margaret.obrien at ucsb.edu  Thu Nov 13 18:50:13 2014
From: margaret.obrien at ucsb.edu (Margaret O'Brien)
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2014 18:50:13 -0800
Subject: [eml-dev] Question about eml personnel
In-Reply-To: <8d747fb14b914858aa2e9a3200c23243@SINPR06MB204.apcprd06.prod.outlook.com>
References: <8d747fb14b914858aa2e9a3200c23243@SINPR06MB204.apcprd06.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: <54656DE5.8080705@ucsb.edu>

Hi Christy -
I am the data manager for one of the US-LTER sites (Santa Barbara 
Coastal LTER). there are lots of uses for the responsibleParty module 
under eml-dataset. And you're right, the major hassle is figuring out 
how various people are involved.

Our priorities for choosing how to apply the EML-fields are below:
1.we want a dataset citation to make sense. Most of the time, dataset 
citations seem to be mirroring paper citations -- although this might 
not always be appropriate. So if a citation is planned to have 'people' 
cited, those people belong at this xpath: 
dataset/creator/individualName, and in the order they should be cited.

We have some datasets that are reposted from other sources. For these, 
we respect the wishes of the originator, (eg, U.S. Geological Survey or 
NASA), and they often want the organization to be cited, so for these, 
we use dataset/creator/organization

we use the <publisher> field for the organization we want to appear in 
the citation as the publisher.

2. We record how people's involvement in a dataset might have changed 
(e.g., for a time-series that is regularly updated), we use 
dataset/associatedParty. Here, you can specify how a person was involved 
by filling out the string field <role>. Since it's a string field, it 
can vary as much as it needs to. These could be the same people as in 
the creator elements, or different ones. If they are the same people, I 
prefer to repopulate those fields rather than use internal references.

3. dataset contact: for this, we use dataset/contact/positionName (not 
an individual), and put in the  position "data manager", with a 
persistent, non-personal email (we use our site's ticket-tracking 
email). This ensures that someone will be around to answer questions 
about the dataset.

4. project: we use the project module to describe the responsible 
umbrella project. So the  boilerplate includes the people who are 
principal investigators on the funding grant. You can include more 
detailed sub-projects, but I don't know of any instances of that. We 
trust the data catalogs we post to to not use these fields in regular 
queries, but in reality, we have no control over that.  It would look 
odd in a data catalog to see the same small group appearing to be 
attached to every dataset, but I suppose that is appropriate at some 
level -- e.g., from the funder's point of view.


I hope this helps -
best,
Margaret


-----------
Margaret O'Brien
Information Management
Santa Barbara Coastal LTER
Marine Science Institute, UCSB
Santa Barbara, CA 93106
805-893-2071 (voice)
http://sbc.lternet.edu


On 11/13/2014 5:38 PM, Christy Lee. Geromboux wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I am new to the LTERN data team, and am trying to get my head around 
> EML. I was hoping to gain some understanding around where various 
> personnel ought to be acknowledged. Specifically the differentiation 
> between dataset creators, dataset owners, project personnel, and 
> funding bodies that require citation. I have tried to illustrate my 
> question with a fictitious example in blue, and where I have copied 
> the relevant EML documentation I have used purple.
>
> We have many data sets that fall under various umbrella projects 
> (which we call Plot Networks).
>
> For example there a Project:
>
> Three Parks Savanna Plot Network
>
> There are many data sets have been produced as part of this project.
>
> For example:
>
> Three Parks Savanna Plot Network: Dataset 1
>
> Three Parks Savanna Plot Network: Dataset 2
>
> We have situations where the Plot Network leader (i.e. guy who signs 
> the data deeds), is not the same person who created the data set, and 
> does not require citation. But we need to acknowledge that he is the 
> leader of the project and therefore has final say regarding all 
> datasets that belong to this project.
>
> So in the above example:
>
> Bob is the plot leader for Three Parks Savanna Fire-effects Plot Network
>
> But:
>
> John is the data set creator for the package Three Parks Savanna Plot 
> Network: Dataset 1
>
> Bob is the data set creator for the package Three Parks Savanna Plot 
> Network: Dataset 2
>
> Also:
>
> OrganisationA is a funding body for the entire Plot Network and 
> therefore requires citation for all datasets in this project.
>
> As I understand:
>
> 1.The eml-project <personnel> tag can be used for the owner of the 
> Plot Network (i.e. Bob), and we can give him/her a role of "Owner". 
> The relevant EML documentation from  is below:
>
> *2.4.5. The eml-project module - Research context information for 
> resources*
>
> The eml-project module describes the research context in which the 
> dataset was created, including descriptions of over-all motivations 
> and goals, funding, personnel, description of the study area etc. This 
> is also the module to describe the design of the project: the 
> scientific questions being asked, the architecture of the design, etc. 
> This module is used to place the dataset that is being documented into 
> its larger research context.
>
> *personnel *
>
> This element has no default value.
>
> Content of this field: Description of this field:
>
> Derived from: rp:ResponsibleParty (by xs:extension)
>
> The Personnel field extends ResponsibleParty with role information and 
> is used to document people involved in a research project by providing 
> contact information and their role in the project. A project must have 
> at least one originator.
>
> *role *
>
> The role field contains information about role a person plays in a 
> research project. There are a number of suggested roles, however, it 
> is possible to add a role if the suggested roles are not adequate.
>
> Example(s):
>
> author
>
> contentProvider
>
> custodianSteward
>
> distributor
>
> editor
>
> metadataProvider
>
> originator
>
> owner
>
> ...
>
> 2.Where as the <creator> tag in the eml-dataset module would contain 
> the people and organisations that make up the citation for the dataset 
> (either Bob or John, as well as OrganisationA). See EML documentation 
> below:
>
> **
>
> *creator *
>
> This element has no default value.
>
> Content of this field: Description of this field:
>
> Type: rp:ResponsibleParty
>
> The 'creator' element provides the full name of the person, 
> organization, or position who created the resource. The list of 
> creators for a resource represent the people and organizations who 
> should be cited for the resource.
>
> So citations would include:
>
> John and OrganisationA. Three Parks Savanna Plot Network: Dataset 1
>
> Bob and OrganisationA. Three Parks Savanna Plot Network: Dataset 2
>
> And the Project personnel for both of these datasets would list Bob 
> with a role of Owner.
>
> Have I got the correct understanding? Hopefully this all makes sense!
>
> Regards,
>
> Christy Geromboux
>
> Data Curator
>
> The Fenner School of Environment and Society ANU
>
> College of Medicine, Biology & Environment
>
> Fenner Building 141,
>
> The Australian National University ACT 0200
>
> Australia
>
> T: + 61 2 6125 5580
>
> christy.geromboux at anu.edu.au <mailto:christy.geromboux at anu.edu.au>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Eml-dev mailing list
> Eml-dev at ecoinformatics.org
> http://lists.nceas.ucsb.edu/ecoinformatics/mailman/listinfo/eml-dev

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nceas.ucsb.edu/ecoinformatics/pipermail/eml-dev/attachments/20141113/088ccbdf/attachment-0001.html>

From announce at dublincore.net  Tue Nov 18 13:14:38 2014
From: announce at dublincore.net (DCMI Announce)
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2014 13:14:38 -0800
Subject: [eml-dev] Wednesday's DCMI webinar on Learning Resource Metadata
	Initiative (LRMI)
Message-ID: <CAP884Eyo_O4kiBFk6XwQdxpTg9+s77YWHtW0A9tV3+okE_yQ8g@mail.gmail.com>

*The Learning Resource Metadata Initiative, describing learning resources
with schema.org <http://schema.org/>, and more?*

*Phil Barker & Lorna Campbell (Cetis, UK)*

******************Please excuse the cross postings******************

--*Date: *19 November, 2014
--*Time:* 10:00am-11:15am EST (UTC 15:00) World Clock: http://bit.ly/1pKiCUj
--*Event webpage:*
  http://dublincore.org/resources/training/
    or

https://www.asis.org/Conferences/webinars/Webinar-DCMI-11-19-2014-register.html

***************************************************************************

*ABOUT THE WEBINAR:*

The Learning Resource Metadata Initiative (LRMI) is a collaborative
initiative that aims to make it easier for teachers and learners to find
educational materials through major search engines and specialized resource
discovery services. The approach taken by LRMI is to extend the
schema.org ontology
so that educationally significant characteristics and relationships can be
expressed. In this webinar, Phil Barker and Lorna M. Campbell of Cetis will
introduce schema.org and present the background to LRMI, its aims and
objectives, and who is involved in achieving them. The webinar will outline
the technical aspects of the LRMI specification, describe some example
implementations and demonstrate how the discoverability of learning
resources may be enhanced. Phil and Lorna will present the latest
developments in LRMI implementation, drawing on an analysis of its use by a
range of open educational resource repositories and aggregators, and will
report on the potential of LRMI to enhance education search and discovery
services. Whereas the development of LRMI has been inspired by schema.org,
the webinar will also include discussion of whether LRMI has applications
beyond those of schema.org.

*SPEAKERS:*

*Lorna Campbell* has worked in the domain of open education technology and
interoperability standards for over fifteen years and has contributed to
the development of a number of learning resource metadata specifications.
Phil and Lorna were commissioned by Creative Commons to manage the third
phase of the Learning Resource Metadata Initiative. LRMI is co-led by
Creative Commons and the Association of Educational Publishers (AEP)--now
the 501(c)(3) arm of the Association of American Publishers.

*Phil Barker* is a research fellow at Heriot-Watt University who has worked
supporting the use of learning technology in Higher Education for twenty
years. For much of this time he has worked with Lorna M. Campbell as part
of Cetis. His work focuses on supporting the discovery and selection of
appropriate resources, and he has contributed to the development of a
number of learning resource metadata specifications. He was on the
technical working group of the learning resource metadata initiative and
has since worked on the third phase of LRMI promoting its uptake and use.

***************************************************************************

*For more information and to register, visit the event webpage:*
  *DCMI:* http://dublincore.org/resources/training/
    or
  *ASIS&T:*
https://www.asis.org/Conferences/webinars/Webinar-DCMI-11-19-2014-register.html
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nceas.ucsb.edu/ecoinformatics/pipermail/eml-dev/attachments/20141118/d83a0bda/attachment.html>

From kbraak at gbif.org  Thu Nov 27 04:04:05 2014
From: kbraak at gbif.org (Kyle Braak)
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2014 13:04:05 +0100
Subject: [eml-dev] Storing a DOI for a dataset in EML
Message-ID: <2A912AEA-4CA7-408C-AC53-F3434ABB3BF2@gbif.org>

Hi eml-dev list, 

I?m trying to figure out the best way to store a DOI for a dataset in EML. 

The DOI resolves to a page where both the data and metadata are available for download, and is intended to be used as a unique identifier for the dataset for example when citing it.

Currently in our EML, we use a packageId on the <eml:eml> element defined in the ID-System ?http://gbif.org?. For example:

<eml:eml packageId="6f08304a-43e6-41bd-a3a9-f9bbf93984b3/v1.7" system="http://gbif.org" scope="system">

Below my signature 4 options we?re considering, and I?d greatly appreciate any guidance or feedback on which is best. 

Kind regards,

Kyle Braak
Developer
Secretariat of the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF)
Universitetsparken 15, DK-2100 Copenhagen ?
Denmark, Europe
www.gbif.org


Option 1:

Storing the DOI inside alternateIdentifier. 

The problem I see with this option, however, arises when there are multiple DOI alternateIdentifiers. How to know which is the primary/latest DOI?

Option 2:

Storing the DOI using the citation ?identifier? attribute. 

The problem with this option, however, is that it isn?t very prominent hidden away in this location. 

Option 3:

Storing the DOI using the ?packageId? attribute. It could include the dataset version number so that each version is always unique. For example:

<eml:eml packageId="doi:10.5886/1bft7W5f_v1.7" scope="system" system="http://doi.org/?>

Option 4:

Storing the DOI using the dataset ?id? attribute, in combination with ?system? and ?scope? attributes to specify that the identifier is defined in the ID-system ?http://doi.org/? For example:

<dataset id="doi:10.5886/1bft7W5f" scope="system" system="http://doi.org/?>

I suspect, however, that this is not best practice assuming ?system? should only be defined once on the <eml:eml> element, and scope=?document? should be be used on all other elements. 


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nceas.ucsb.edu/ecoinformatics/pipermail/eml-dev/attachments/20141127/718126d2/attachment.html>

From leinfelder at nceas.ucsb.edu  Thu Nov 27 10:04:33 2014
From: leinfelder at nceas.ucsb.edu (Ben Leinfelder)
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2014 10:04:33 -0800
Subject: [eml-dev] Storing a DOI for a dataset in EML
In-Reply-To: <2A912AEA-4CA7-408C-AC53-F3434ABB3BF2@gbif.org>
References: <2A912AEA-4CA7-408C-AC53-F3434ABB3BF2@gbif.org>
Message-ID: <98AD364D-9FB7-4E43-9297-36F830BB2E8E@nceas.ucsb.edu>

Hi Kyle,
It seems like your first option is the best one since the DOI represents an identifier for the EML package you are creating. I'm not sure I understand your concern with multiple DOIs since each version of the EML package should only have one corresponding DOI, but please explain further if I've misinterpreted.
Thanks,
-ben

On Nov 27, 2014, at 4:04 AM, Kyle Braak <kbraak at gbif.org> wrote:

> Option 1:
> 
> Storing the DOI inside alternateIdentifier. 
> 
> The problem I see with this option, however, arises when there are multiple DOI alternateIdentifiers. How to know which is the primary/latest DOI?
> 


From kbraak at gbif.org  Thu Nov 27 10:30:52 2014
From: kbraak at gbif.org (Kyle Braak)
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2014 19:30:52 +0100
Subject: [eml-dev] Storing a DOI for a dataset in EML
In-Reply-To: <2A912AEA-4CA7-408C-AC53-F3434ABB3BF2@gbif.org>
References: <2A912AEA-4CA7-408C-AC53-F3434ABB3BF2@gbif.org>
Message-ID: <24EAA313-B436-4DD9-8301-480201D9E305@gbif.org>

Hi again eml-dev list, 

For the sake of clarify, I just wanted to add to my previous email and explain that of the 4 options I listed, #2 is independent of EML since there is no ?identifier? attribute for citation in EML. This is something specific to our own metadata schema (albeit based largely on EML). 

Thanks for any help in advance, and Happy Thanksgiving to those in the US.

Kyle

On 27 Nov 2014, at 13:04, Kyle Braak <kbraak at gbif.org> wrote:

> Hi eml-dev list, 
> 
> I?m trying to figure out the best way to store a DOI for a dataset in EML. 
> 
> The DOI resolves to a page where both the data and metadata are available for download, and is intended to be used as a unique identifier for the dataset for example when citing it.
> 
> Currently in our EML, we use a packageId on the <eml:eml> element defined in the ID-System ?http://gbif.org?. For example:
> 
> <eml:eml packageId="6f08304a-43e6-41bd-a3a9-f9bbf93984b3/v1.7" system="http://gbif.org" scope="system">
> 
> Below my signature 4 options we?re considering, and I?d greatly appreciate any guidance or feedback on which is best. 
> 
> Kind regards,
> 
> Kyle Braak
> Developer
> Secretariat of the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF)
> Universitetsparken 15, DK-2100 Copenhagen ?
> Denmark, Europe
> www.gbif.org
> 
> 
> Option 1:
> 
> Storing the DOI inside alternateIdentifier. 
> 
> The problem I see with this option, however, arises when there are multiple DOI alternateIdentifiers. How to know which is the primary/latest DOI?
> 
> Option 2:
> 
> Storing the DOI using the citation ?identifier? attribute. 
> 
> The problem with this option, however, is that it isn?t very prominent hidden away in this location. 
> 
> Option 3:
> 
> Storing the DOI using the ?packageId? attribute. It could include the dataset version number so that each version is always unique. For example:
> 
> <eml:eml packageId="doi:10.5886/1bft7W5f_v1.7" scope="system" system="http://doi.org/?>
> 
> Option 4:
> 
> Storing the DOI using the dataset ?id? attribute, in combination with ?system? and ?scope? attributes to specify that the identifier is defined in the ID-system ?http://doi.org/? For example:
> 
> <dataset id="doi:10.5886/1bft7W5f" scope="system" system="http://doi.org/?>
> 
> I suspect, however, that this is not best practice assuming ?system? should only be defined once on the <eml:eml> element, and scope=?document? should be be used on all other elements. 
> 
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.nceas.ucsb.edu/ecoinformatics/pipermail/eml-dev/attachments/20141127/d081bcab/attachment.html>

