Notes on APARSEN MegaMeeting Thursday 3 May 2012


  • Simon Lambert
  • David Giaretta
  • Krystina Giaretta
  • Stefan Proell
  • Frederic Darre
  • Maurizio Lunghi
  • Sharon McMeekin
  • Orit Edelstein
  • Patricia Herterich
  • Sabine Schimpf
  • Barbara Bazzanella
  • Andreas Hundsdoerfer
  • Holger Brocks
  • Olivier Rouchon
  • Gerald Jaeschke
  • Veronika Praendl-Zika
  • Yannis Tzitzikas
  • Juha Lehtonen
  • Christoph Bruch
  • Ash Hunter
  • Chiara Cirinna
  • Hans Ulrich
  • Rene van Horik
  • Herve L'Hours
  • John Lindstrom
  • Silvio Salza
  • Kirnn Kaur
  • Jeffery van der Hoeven


Status of Month 16 Checkpoint

SL confirmed that the documentation for the checkpoint had been submitted on the 30 April including the revised Year 1 Report, which included the Year 2 plan and the revised deliverables with explanations as to why three of the deliverables had been postponed. DG reminded everyone that there are a lot of internal deliverables coming due and we cannot risk the problems that were encountered at the last review. We need to ensure we keep up momentum and the work flow continues, in order to meet the deadlines. We need to move the deliverables to an earlier date to ensure there is sufficient time to complete and review them prior to submission.

Review of notes from previous meeting

SL reminded everyone that it is important to look at the notes as a record of what has been decided and the actions.

Review of Actions

These actions are for all the individual WP's to look at and respond accordingly.

Administrative matters

In the first year report Form C's, there were inconsistencies in the way in which explanations were given. We need to justify what the costs are in terms of person months. DG and SL will be coming back to the partners and asking for further details to be entered into the on-line system, which should result in less queries being returned to us by the EC. DG explained that Project Officers are being forced to act almost as auditors and therefore we need to ensure more detail is included in the submission. Simply putting in 'Travel Expenses' is no longer acceptable. There were inconsistencies with the effort recorded on the Management Web Site, when compared with the Form C entries so DG has reviewed them so that they are consistent as far as possible. However now that we have submitted the P1 report, partners need to update their Form C information with effort per WP in line with the numbers in the P1 report.

DNB are unable to host the June meeting so Krystina will look for an alternative venue.

Stream 1 Integration - Deliverables and Work Packages

William Kilbride was unable to attend the meeting to report on Stream 1 activities.

WP14 - Ash advised that DNB provided a test bed and that he is putting the process up on the Wiki.

WP16 - DG reported that work will proceed as we are closer to finalising D14.1.

Stream 2 Technical Research - Deliverables and Work Packages

Due to sound technical problems Chiara Cirinna was unable to report on this WP and SL suggested we should follow up at the PMB in the afternoon.

Stream 3 Economic & Legal Research - Deliverables and Work Packages

APA has volunteered to take over the lead on WP34.

Stream 4 Sustainable Uptake - Deliverables and Work Packages

WP41 - Hans reported on the latest position on arranging workshops - looking for options and possibilities for iPres. They are also in the process of planning and finalising the APARSEN workshop for the meeting in June. Would like APARSEN partners to take part in the Open Access meeting in Vienna.

WP43 - Nothing new to report

WP44 - Three versions of the new logo have been sent out to the group for comment.

Any other topics

DG told the group that the plan was that when the deliverables have been produced we should discuss them in an open forum of various social networks. DG had been tweeting and putting things on LinkedIn, but he said that the authors of the deliverables should also be spreading the word in this way and he was disappointed that this was not happening and asked everyone to use the #APARSEN hash tag.

There is a deadline for iPres in less than two weeks and Rene has put a page up on the Wiki. We do have something new to present on Authenticity, Persistent Identifiers and Audit and Certification. The onus is on those who produce deliverables and we should be showing this 'loud and clear', otherwise there is a great danger we will be heavily criticised.

Rene proposed a session for iPres, like the one in Sheffield - the deadline is 15 May. Does anybody know what is expected for a workshop presentation at iPres and can someone find out? Rene suggested a panel for one hour followed by Q & A's, using the same model as the Sheffield session, and will forward this suggestion for the APARSEN participation at iPres.


- Rene will prepare a proposal for the workshop and check with Ingrid if she is putting in a paper on audit and certification

- Maurizio will produce a paper on Persistent Identifiers

- Silvio and Yannis will produce papers on Authenticity and Provenance

- Hans will produce a paper on Data Quality

- DG will produce a paper or propose a workshop on Audit and Certification, although he noted that we can only be present for the first 2 days of iPRES because although he will be in Canada before iPRES in order to speak at the UNESCO conference, he has to return to Europe to give a pre-arranged talk on 4th Oct.

- DG and SL will write to the Project Officer to check if taking part in this conference, which is outside Europe, is OK

-- KrystinaGiaretta - 2012-05-08

Edit | Attach | Watch | Print version | History: r2 < r1 | Backlinks | Raw View | Raw edit | More topic actions
Topic revision: r2 - 2012-05-08 - DavidGiaretta
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