Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata
===================================
Attending: David Greenbaum, Patrick Schmitz, Chris Hoffman, Steve Masover, Quinn Dombrowski
===================================
NOTES:
===================================
The libraries, research computing and the VCRO were the key partners at CU-Boulder.  Are there other, or additional, groups that would be key partners at UCB?
* Library - Digital Publishing Group - http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/digicoll/aboutdpg/contact.html
* VCR - Berkeley Research Development Office - mission to make it easier for faculty to win grants
Some acknowledgement that there are turf issues in play: people want "their own" solutions.
What measures have been put in place to respond to the data management plan requirements of the NSF, NEH, etc? (at campus and/or local levels)
* CDL's Data Management Plan (DMP) tool (but not well communicated by library to UCB faculty)
* VCR (?)
What are the local centers/organizations where we can tap into expertise on data stewardship (like the National Snow and Ice Data Center at CU-Boulder)?
* We can imagine candidates who might, but we don't know where these orgs actually exist at UCB
Are research data management services an opportunity that we clearly want to pursue at the end of this process? If so, what steps can and should we take, starting now, that will lay the groundwork for an eventual proposal, without distracting from the other things we need to do?
PLS: MarComm planning only?
DAG: There's a need here, we may want to look into addressing some piece of it even _before_ our full process of identifying strategic direction. Example: will dLab need support on issues in this space?
CH: Many requirements. Decompose and service oriented / API / integration story more likely to succeed than One Big System to do Everything. Note in Colorado report that all four systems they evaluated were inadequate to 'all the data needs'
  • No labels