Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Initial potential Working Group issues #389

Open
cmbarton opened this issue Dec 7, 2021 · 9 comments
Open

Initial potential Working Group issues #389

cmbarton opened this issue Dec 7, 2021 · 9 comments
Assignees
Labels
governance Suggestions for OMF organization and governance

Comments

@cmbarton
Copy link
Contributor

cmbarton commented Dec 7, 2021

@cmbarton cmbarton added the governance Suggestions for OMF organization and governance label Dec 7, 2021
@cmbarton cmbarton self-assigned this Dec 7, 2021
@crvernon
Copy link

crvernon commented Dec 7, 2021

For the Certification Working Group per the following:

The CWG coordinates collaborative efforts with journals, funding agencies, societies, institutions/labs, other software/modeling consortia, and professional bodies to disseminate and administer OMF standards across the community of modeling science, and to promote recognition of OMF standards.

Start compiling a list of potential journals to collaborate with, or accept as a prerequisite, for badging. E.g., EMS, JOSS, etc.

@epistemographer
Copy link

epistemographer commented Dec 7, 2021

To elaborate on "peer review," in the last meeting there was a discussion of the distinct needs for publication of models as first-order products. Several people felt that the Journal of Open Source Software was a good start, but didn't fully address modeling use cases. A set of guidelines and a reference implementation of a review workflow using JOSS would be a tangible project.

@epistemographer
Copy link

Another "best practice" project - guidance for funders of modeling projects. Might depend on the establishment of a certification process for open models, so that funders could just reference standards in proposal and reporting guidelines

@hrajagers
Copy link

Draft a list of "grand challenges" associated with the OMF vision?

@platipodium
Copy link
Contributor

Several people felt that the Journal of Open Source Software was a good start, but didn't fully address modeling use cases.

Agree. JOSS is more on software, its documentation, functionality, but not so much on its target-orientation or science context that we require for our models

@epistemographer
Copy link

For the Certification Working Group per the following:

The CWG coordinates collaborative efforts with journals, funding agencies, societies, institutions/labs, other software/modeling consortia, and professional bodies to disseminate and administer OMF standards across the community of modeling science, and to promote recognition of OMF standards.

Start compiling a list of potential journals to collaborate with, or accept as a prerequisite, for badging. E.g., EMS, JOSS, etc.

I'd love to see the Certification Working Group developing working prototypes that can implement standards in automated certification tools where possible.

@cmbarton
Copy link
Contributor Author

Here is a paper that might be of use for the Certification Working Group: https://f1000research.com/articles/10-253

@cmbarton
Copy link
Contributor Author

For the Certification Working Group

An automated FAIR Data Assessment Tool: https://www.f-uji.net/index.php

This seems still in alpha stage. My one attempt to run this against digitally published FAIR software was a failure.

@cmbarton
Copy link
Contributor Author

For standards WG:

FAIR Digital Objects: https://fairdo.org/wg/

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
governance Suggestions for OMF organization and governance
Projects
Status: In Progress
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants