WP 32 Cost/benefit data collection and modelling meeting minutes: 10th May 2012

Attendees: David Giaretta (STFC), Simon Lambert (STFC), Rene Van Horik (DANS), Sharon McMeekin (DPC), Patricia H (CERN), Sabine Schrimpf (DNB), Heiko Tjalsma (DANS), Christoph Bruch (Helmoltz), Kirnn Kaur (BL)

ACTIONS ASSIGNED IN BRACKETS

Review of outstanding actions

  • To be reviewed following agreement of detailed project plan [ALL]
Review of draft project plan
  • Plan is divided into a number of sections:
    1. Research
    2. Cost model analysis
    3. Cross model analysis
    4. Cost parameters
    5. Testing of models using parameters
    6. Deliverable
    7. Milestone
  • To agree detailed tasks and assign them to participants. [ALL]
  • Background on cost model work already undertaken is that it has focussed on small scale not large scale repositories. Many different digital objects are involved. Using the repositories from consortium partners we can review the published models and test them. The testing may result in the need for some models to be re-written. We may be aBle to provide a figure for the costs of DP by model and carry out comparisons. DG
  • We could provide targeted advice on the most suitable model depending on the type of activity being carried out by an organisation. [ALL]
  • To remove ‘benefit’ from title of WP as this will be covered by WP36 Business Cases. [DG]
  • The analysis of models should provide details on the parameters to be tested for different types of repositories. We need to ensure that we cover each type of repository. DG [ALL]
  • We should review models to see what information is required. There may be common areas across different models. SS [ALL]
  • A structure needs to be provided in order collect the information e.g. a questionnaire. SS [KK]
  • DP4lib cost model is not restricted to a particular system (e.g. DIAS) but can be used with others e.g. Safety Deposit Box, the LIBER system. SS
  • Each model/parameter will have to be described in detail so users can understand where specific costings are included. DG [ALL]
  • We need to ‘add value’ to cost models and think of how we present the various models when included in the VCoE. KK [ALL]
  • For cost parameters it may be that some partners are more able to provide data than others e.g. STFC may have data on repositories. DG
  • With anonymisation more partners may be comfortable in providing accurate data. DG
Knowledge Exchange Workshop 11th June
  • SS presenting DP4lib model, HT presenting DANS model. LIFE model may mention APARSEN work.
  • Of the 7 presenters, three may mention APARSEN.
  • The workshop will allow for collaboration and an understanding of the work being done on cost modelling across various sectors.
AOB
  • Effort allocation
    • need to confirm effort allocation (in some cases partners are not involved at all or have limited input). To be raised at PMB. KK [CB]
    • funds cannot be redistributed, however effort can be. To be discussed at PMB with presentation and agreement at GA. [DG]
    • review to be carried out across all WPs. Project members to be emailed on effort allocation. [SL]
  • Title of WP should be changed to delete benefit as this will be covered under WP 36 Business Cases. [DG]

Next meeting

  • 24th May 2012

K Kaur

-- KirnnKaur - 2012-06-06

Edit | Attach | Watch | Print version | History: r2 < r1 | Backlinks | Raw View | Raw edit | More topic actions
Topic revision: r2 - 2012-06-15 - KirnnKaur
 
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform Powered by PerlCopyright © 2008-2019 by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
Ideas, requests, problems regarding TWiki? Send feedback