Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

Date

12:00-13:30UTC

Participants

  • ET-IM

    • Ge Peng (GP)

    • William Wright (WW)

    • Tim Boyer (TB)

    • Feng Gao (FG)

    • Peng Wang (PW)

  • WMO Secretariat

    • Enrico Fucile (EF)

    • Hassan Haddouch (HH)

    • David Berry (DB)

    • Xiaoxia Chen (XC)

  • Others

Apologies

  • Axel Andersson (AA)

  • Rachid Sebbari (RS)

  • Feng Gao (FG)

Agenda

  1. Review of past minutes and actions

  2. Update from Secretariat

    1. Target for IM guide

    2. Proposed timeline

  3. Report(s) from related Expert Teams and Task Teams

    1. SC-IMT meeting on 2021-10-25

    2. SERCOM ET-DRC on 2021-10-20

  4. Review and discuss the draft document version 0.1

  5. Date of next meeting

Discussion topics

Item

Presenter

Notes

1 Review of past minutes and actions

David Berry

Note change in number from res 42 to res 1.

The Team review the task list (Meeting notes - ET-IM - Confluence (atlassian.net)) and minutes from the last meeting.

David Berry noted that there had been in change in the resolution number of the new WMO Data Policy, from Resolution 42 to Resolution 1 (List of Resolutions approved at Cg-2021)

WW

William J Wright (Unlicensed) reported that he is still working on the lifecycle section together with

RS, will hopefully distribute in next week

Rachid Sebbari, noting that he would hopefully share the current draft with Rachid by the 5th November. This would then be more widely circulated a week later.

2 Update from Secretariat

David Berry

David Berry gave a brief update from the Secretariat noting the result of internal discussions.

  • Target for IM guide

  • A standalone document

Proposed timelinelifecycle section shared with RS by 5th November.

Draft document prepared by the team be ready for comments at
  • :

    • The target for the “Guide on Information Management” would be as a standalone document, either as a volume within the Guide to the WMO Information System or as a WIS Guide to Information Management.

  • Proposed timeline:

    • It was proposed that the first milestone for the guide would be to have a good draft ready for circulation and review by the end of January 2022

  • Discussion over timeline, WW aiming to have

  • Discussion over scope,
      • .

      • Following this, two more drafts and reviews would be planned at three monthly intervals, with a final draft ready by mid summer 2022.

    • Following discussion of the timeline, the Team discussed the scope, noting the need to reference existing materials

    , e.g. manual on WIS etc. some examples would also
    • rather than duplicate them. It was also noted that having concrete examples would help the reader.

    HH:
    • HADDOUCH Hassan noted that for this version we only need to develop the high level elements

    . If
    • and that if we need more detail we should link to existing sources

    /
    • and references

    giving
    • providing those details.

    Diagrams
    • It was also noted that having rich visuals and diagrams would also be helpful, e.g. illustration of the data lifecycle

    of data
    • .

    HH to contact Rachid after meeting
    • HADDOUCH Hassan reported that he would follow up with Rachid Sebbari on the lifecycle and other sections.

    3 Report(s) from related Expert Teams and Task Teams

    Ge Peng (Unlicensed)

    Ge Peng

    , attended

    (Unlicensed) reported that she attended the recent SC-IMT chairs meeting and updated

    SC

    the Committee on activity of

    ET-IM

    the Team. The meeting details can be found at:

    https://community.wmo.int/meetings/sc-imt-chairs-telecon-2021-oct-25

    Information Management flagged as timely and important by chair of SC-IMT. Chair advised the team

    Ge Peng (Unlicensed) reported that the activity of the Team was flagged to be timely by the Chair (Rémy Giraud) of the SC-IMT, and the importance of information management noted. The Chair advised the Team to consider how to integrate the guide

    wit

    to information management with the wider body of

    WIS / WMO manuals and guides. WS can help and

    the WMO and WIS regulatory material (i.e. WMO guides and manuals). William J Wright (Unlicensed) noted that he is currently reviewing the Manual on

    WIS. GP - the work of this team may leverage work by other ETs, for example of

    the WMO Information System (Manual on the WMO Information System | E-Library) as part of another activity and could potentially help with identifying relevant material.

    Ge Peng (Unlicensed) noted that the work of the Team may also leverage that of other expert teams, for example on information security, data standards etc.

    GP to WW: Currently updating manual, with information from other manuals (WIS, GDPFS, Codes). timeline for finishing work is end of November. The manual will have a few new attachments, including approval processes for updating manuals, fast track process etc. Summary

    It was agreed that Ge Peng (Unlicensed), with the help of the Secretariat (David Berry), would reach out to those other teams where relevant to identify overlap between the teams and complementary activities on information management.

    3 Report(s) from related Expert Teams and Task Teams

    Ge Peng (Unlicensed)

    GP: AA, WW, GP all members of ET-DRC as well.

    GP: ET-DRC, meeting 2? October. Revision of HQ GDMFC (WMO1238) document, this provide more information. Including review of WMO publications.

    Update on status of OpenCDMS and DAYCLI, including latest template and inclusion of QC flags.

    Ge Peng (Unlicensed) and William J Wright (Unlicensed) also reported on the recent meeting of the Expert Team - Data Requirements for Climate (ET-DRC), noting that Axel.Andersson (Unlicensed) and Rachid Sebbari were also members of the Team. During the meeting at the start of October revision of the WMO Manual on High Quality Data Management Framework for Climate (WMO 1238) was discussed, together with a wider review of WMO publications relevant to the management of climate data (for example Manuals on WIS, GDPFS etc). It was noted that the revision of WMO 1238 would include information from those other publications where appropriate, with a target date of completing the revision by the end of November. William J Wright (Unlicensed) also noted that the manual was being extended to include information on the governance process for making changes to the manual (e.g. fast track etc) and a summary of guidelines relevant to climate data management.

    Something for this group to consider.

    Other initiatives on decadal climate summaries.

    CDMS, main person responsible Denis Stuber. Discussion on WIGOS Metadata Model. DB to lead effort developing data model for OpenCDMS.

    DAYCLI message: discussion with ET-Data & TT-TDCF over requirements for DAYCLI messages.

    • DB: update the DayCLI BUFR template is ready

    Climate normals, normal period now 1991 - 2020 but 1961 - 1990 kept as reference period.

    WMO1131 needs to be updated, a lot of new material and guidance has been published since original publication

    It was suggested that this Team might consider something similar.

    William J Wright (Unlicensed) reported that in addition to WMO 1238 the ET-DRC also discussed activities related to: decadal climate summaries; recognition of centennial length climate observing stations, including expanding to other networks; the collection and collation of new WMO Climate Normals, covering the period 1991 - 2020; the OpenCDMS project, main contact with ET-DRC is Denis Stuber; and collaboration with the Expert Team on Data Standards (ET-Data) on a new BUFR sequence for daily climate reporting. It was noted that David Berry would be helping lead the activity within the OpenCDMS project on data standards and data models for climate data, building on past experience from a Copernicus C3S project / service providing climate observations through the climate data store. David Berry also noted that the new BUFR sequence for DAYCLI message had been validated and that he would double check the status and report back. (post meeting note by David Berry: the DAYCLI sequence is undergoing further testing and evaluation within the community).

    Finally, it was noted at the ET-DRC meeting that the WMO CDMS specification (WMO 1131) is in need of an update, with a lot of new material and technological changes published and developed since it was written.

    4 Review and discuss the draft document version 0.1

    IM Guide, 2 sections (IM and technologies, IM & security) leads needed.

    Also leads needed for annexes on special processes (marine, climate).

    IM and technologies - HH will propose some content for sections. WW very good guidance from “working group on emerging data issues”.

    Question, just WMO or do we need to include cloud. HH we just need generic paragraph on these issues to be complete. 4 main components:

    Ge Peng (Unlicensed)

    Discussion of the current draft focused on two sections:

    • Information management and technologies

    • Information management and security

    noting that leads for the two sections were required. The Team also noted that leads for the annexes on “special processes” were required, particularly oceans and climate.

    HADDOUCH Hassan agreed to provide some content for the two main sections noted above and William J Wright (Unlicensed) flagged that there was very good guidance from the working group on emerging data issues. As part of the discussion, the scope of the sections was queried and whether the document and Team only include WMO areas or whether it should also cover the cloud and cloud technologies. Hassan suggested that a few paragraphs should be enough, keeping them fairly generic and covering 4 main components.

    1. Information management is about people, not just those involved in

    IM
    1. the information management but also

    creators and users
  • policies and processes, business rules.

  • Technology, physical items -
    1. the users and creators of information.

    2. Policies, processes and business rules

    3. Technology, i.e. the “physical” items such as computers, databases, software etc.

    One phrase dealing with best practices on technology
    1. Data and information

    .

    Useful to have examples but we need the structure first.

    WW: question of DM / IM policies. The document we’ve got doesn’t deal with this in great detail. Do we need to enumerate these policies and include in annex. Do we need template of what a policy document looks like?

    EF: policies - this is a vey sensitive argument. A lot of work on defining on tech. regs. defining new data policy. Suggest to avoid mention of policies beyond short paragraph stating that they exist. 2) not sure how to approach subject, usually as soon as you talk or write about technologies they are already out of date. Not convenient to include in detail.

    GP - short note to stay we need to keep up technologies and up to date with best practices.

    Cloud is an example of the sort of information we need to include, benefits and pitfalls. What to watch out for.

    TB: Cloud comes in, what does this mean for data provenance, security and accessibility.

    WW: This is the sort of thing NHMSs need to take into account when putting data or computation jobs on the cloud.

    PW: regarding cloud technology, 1 question. Many authorities would like to chose specific cloud providers, for example selecting local provider. Does this team needs to define standards and capabilities that providers should meet and that users should consider when selecting a provider?

    HH: we need to focus more on best practices
    1. , noting that this may be different to record management

    William J Wright (Unlicensed) noted that so far the discussion of policies within the guide are minimal and questioned whether the guide should be more explicit and enumerate example policies in the annexes. William Wright also suggested providing an example of a good policy template as part of the guide might be helpful. Enrico Fucile responded that policies can be a very sensitive subject and that we need to be careful when talking about policies, noting the recent Congress and the amount of effort involved in getting policies, such as the data policy, approved. When talking about WMO policies it would be best to only briefly mention them in the guide. Enrico Fucile also queried how much detail was needed on technology, with the case that most guides are out of date the moment they are published. Ge Peng (Unlicensed) suggested that only a short note emphasizing the need to keep up to date with technologies and best practices was all that was required. An example policy document might include the policy that best practices need to be regularly reviewed rather than specifying what those best practices should be.

    The discussion moved onto to the use of cloud technologies, with tim.boyer (Unlicensed) and William J Wright (Unlicensed) noting that this was an area where examples of policies may help. For example, there may be issues around data provenance, data security and data access with the move to the cloud. Providing examples of the benefits and pitfalls with cloud technology and what to watch for were highlighted as examples that may be useful for the reader. Peng Wang questioned whether there was a need to specify cloud providers, noting that NHMSs had national policies that they were required to follow. William J Wright (Unlicensed) used an example from Australia, with multiple organizations contributing to the cost of running a national facility for cloud computing, HPC and data storage, to highlight that cloud covered both commercial providers and private clouds. Other examples include the UK JASMIN facility within the UK. Questions to consider included what would happen in the situation of a cloud provider ceasing to operate, what would happen to the data and how would data owners recover their data? What policies need to be in place when selecting or building a cloud based service? HADDOUCH Hassan noted that we need to focus more best practices at a higher level and highlight the need to consider the evolution of

    the

    technology.

    WW: agrees with HH, example from BOM. Understanding with local cloud providers. Each member pays a small fee to keep running, storage and compute facility enable collaboration in the cloud. Questions to consider? what to cloud provider ceases operation, what happens to the data and how do the data owners recover the data.

    PW: discussion over use of cloud providers and internet, particularly in regions where internet can be expensive and / or unreliable. Local regional meteorological networks planned for dissemination of data under WIS1.0 but this does not function very well.

    WW: flagged that in some regions the lack of reliable internet means that climate can not be backed up reliably.

    HH: for first draft keep it short and simple but expand further, two paragraphs without going into too much detail. In future version potentially include more detailed information.

    HH lead to draft high level paragraphs (IM and technologies), due one week before next meeting. Title of section paragraphs to be changed.

    TB: sections pretty disconnects. It would be very good to have a complete first draft in order to understand the overall direction of the document and what belongs in it.

    GP: plan to do this and share 2 weeks before next meeting.

    WW: this will also help identify balance between different sections. Also, what we should be trying to do is identify related documents in Inf. man.

    Following the discussion of cloud based technologies, Peng Wang reminded the Team that using services and data in the cloud does not work for everyone, particularly in those regions where the internet can be expensive, unreliable and / or lack the bandwidth required. The example of regional / local networks for dissemination of data was used, noting that under the current WIS this does not work very well. William J Wright (Unlicensed) provided an example where due to the remoteness of some of the Pacific islands the back up of climate data can be unreliable. All of these issues need to be addresses but it may be hard to cover all eventualities and HADDOUCH Hassan reiterated the need to keep the current version short without going into too much detail, instead focusing on the need to follow best practices and keeping up to date with those practices. In future versions it may be possible to include more detailed information.

    The Team returned to discussing the scope of the guide and how much detail was required. tim.boyer (Unlicensed) commented that at the moment the current draft was disconnected in places and that it would be helpful to see the full collated draft to get a feel for its content and scope. Ge Peng (Unlicensed) responded that this was the plan, once William J Wright (Unlicensed) and Rachid Sebbari have finished the sections on a collated draft would be produced by the Secretariat and circulated prior to the next meeting. HADDOUCH Hassan also agreed to lead the drafting of the high level sections on Information Management and Technologies and on Information Management and Security, noting that the section headings might need to be changed.

    William Wright commented that the collated draft would help to identify any imbalance between the sections and that the Team should try to identify related documents in the Information Management space and reference existing documents in the guide rather than reinventing the wheel.

    GP: something to also

    Ge Peng agreed that this would be useful to keep in mind when reviewing

    full draft. Ocean community has DB: Also Best Practices

    the draft and that other communities, such as the ocean observing community, have best practices documents that can be cross referenced.

    David Berry noted that there is a best practices working group under the GOOS Observations Coordination Group (OCG) and that this group may be good

    reviewers.

    Discussion over how to build list of potential reviewers.

    DB to create

    as

    separate document to collate list of WW: GDMFC document - has

    potential reviewers.

    William J Wright (Unlicensed) reported that they had also sought feedback from the ocean community on the Manual on High Quality global data Management Framework for Climate but with little

    / no

    response of feedback so far.

    Wider discussion over getting feedback and how to consult widely enough,

    The meeting finished by discussing how to build a list of potential reviewers and David Berry agreed to put together a sperate document for use by the Team members to build that list. The Team also recognized and noted the importance of consulting widely (e.g.

    other communities (

    aviation, ocean/marine

    ,

    etc.) in order to make the document as useful as possible.

    5

    Date of next meeting:

    Thursday December 2nd, 1200 UTC

    Action items

    •  David Berry to provide a single document and then circulate it to the team members.Ge Peng (Unlicensed) identify and contact other expert teams that may include aspects of Information Management with the help of Secretariat (David Berry)
    •  HADDOUCH Hassan to help draft parts of IM and technologies : (WIS2, DMS) and IM & Security
    •  William J Wright (Unlicensed) to finish the lifecycle section shared with Rachid and send it back to David for integration
    •  HADDOUCH Hassan to follow up and coordinate with Rachid Sebbari.
    •  David Berry to provide a single document and then circulate it to the team members.
    •  Peng WANG: to share the draft document with CMA colleagues for review
    •  David Berry to create separate document / table for creating list of potential reviewers

    Decisions

    •  Next meeting: 02 December 2021: 12:00UTC

    ...