 Welcome everybody to the ENDS webinar on International Data Week, what happened in Denver? This is sort of a joint webinar, Andrew Chua and I, my name is Stephanie Kittes, we'll be talking for part of the time and then we get perspectives from a variety of participants of the International Data Week. So this is a brief outline, we'll just give a brief introduction, overview of the International Data Week and then we have eight people talking about specific aspects, sessions, outputs, things that they liked along the way during International Data Week. Okay to give a little bit of context, Codata holds a conference which is called CIDataCon every two years and this conference has a research focus. The research data lines as you may know holds a plenary every six months and the current plenary was the ex plenary so we've been doing this for four years and the plenary events have a strong practice focus and are meant for the research data lines working interest groups to come together and advance their work on their goals deliverables and also to bring people together to set up new interest in working groups and gauge the interest for them. So having those two things happen pretty much at the same time gave an opportunity for the planets to align as Andrew put it. This is the first time this has been tried and this resulted in International Data Week which had two days of CIDataCon on the Monday, Tuesday, a day in the middle called International Data Forum and two and a half days of the research data lines plenary at the end so the whole event ran from pretty much Monday morning until Saturday afternoon. And if you were involved in CIData Governments you were doing things on the Sunday before and there were even some co-located events on the Saturday. So the intention of this was to bring the International Data Community together. It also exhausted everybody I think although that wasn't the main intention of the event. Just to give some numbers altogether International Data Week had over 800 I think 816 participants from 42 countries which meant they attended some part of International Data Week not necessarily all of it. CIDataCon had about 640 participants and the RDA Plenary 8 had 551 participants from 33 countries. It was very good to see that 21 Australians registered for the plenary. The plenary had about just over 70 breakout sessions where the groups came together and did their work. And personally I was extremely surprised to see that over 60 people attended the RDA Newcomer session which happened to take place on Thursday morning at quarter past seven so I was immensely impressed to see nearly 70 people in the room. And that was really great. Okay, I'll now hand over to Andrew. And so essentially all of those numbers at least of the RDA segment can be right regardless having increased from previous years. So that's kind of consistent with the general growth trajectory for RDA as a whole. The people attending RDA for Newcomers, this was an innovation that we introduced in Plenary 3 and we've done ever since and this is clearly meeting a need. One of the characteristics of RDA, I'll talk about things in a minute, one of the characteristics is that the plenary moves around so it's held in different locations each six months. And as a result it picks up lots of people in the country or the region that it's in who've never gone before and don't really have any good sense of what RDA is and how it's different. And so the RDA for Newcomers is a great opportunity for those people to get a quick overview of what we're trying to do and some sense of how the plenary itself is structured. I was also particularly pleased with the significant increase in the number of Australians which is great. So the themes of the event were very, but there were some kind of common things that ran across them. So that kind of stuff is said is much more like a conventional conference. There are traditional papers, not actual paper, but there's publications that are associated with that. People speak as short questions of clarification. And this year they said even though the committee is the committee on data for science and technology and even though COData has traditionally had more of a policy focus, this year they decided they wanted to look at research data infrastructure and wanted to talk about issues of data sharing. They had a particular focus on central data and a particular discipline emphasis on earth and space science. The International Data Forum was in the middle and it was intended as the sort of the overlap day between SciDataCon and RDA plenary and a number of the stories that came out of responsibilities of scientists and scientists in quotes because it was deliberately all research onto science. And some of the data stories picked up the theme of sensitive data that SciDataCon had already talked about. And as you'll see in a little while, some of the talks that Stephanie and I like best were in that kind of overlap area. The RDA plenary doesn't really have themes the way a normal conference has themes. So a normal conference will have themes to help people structure what they're putting in under the call for proposals. RDA plenaries typically are much more focused on doing stuff and so these were not explicit themes that they were themes that ran across the two and a half days. So the first thing was that of the increase in momentum in RDA, this is an organization that's continuing to grow, continuing to have people become interested in it. The second theme was the theme of the impact that RDA is having through the results of its working groups and interest groups. And the third theme was the adoption of RDA outputs. And so to talk a bit about those, here is a list of the adoptions that were featured at this particular plenary. So the Brokering Governments Working Group had a series of recommendations for how you might construct connections between infrastructure components so that they go for a broker. You have a series of one-to-one connections into the broker rather than having to come up with multiple point-to-point connections. So that one's clearly got a very infrastructure builder focus. The Code Eight to Summer School Working Group is more focused on providing how you would provide researchers with skills in working with data, using a train-to-trainer model explicitly targeting Africa. Generally low and middle income countries. Yeah, the alert middle income country is going to have a particular focus on Africa this year. The Publishing Data Services Working Group, which is co-led by Adrian Burton, had its recommendations revolve around a thing called the SCOLIX framework, a framework for connecting together different infrastructure elements within the overall publishing data ecosystem. The Biosharing Registry produced a whole series of recommendations on how you might describe elements within the life sciences, and the MetaData Standards Catalog is attempting to do the oily ocean tasks of capturing all the MetaData standards they can get their hands on. In addition to that set of outputs, you'll notice those are all listed as WG on the slide. These are working group outputs. We have what we call supporting outputs from interest groups, a very comprehensive set of principles on legal interoperability from that interest group, and the 23 Things material coming out of the libraries for research data interest group now translated into lots of languages, and I was very pleasing to see the astonishing success of Anne's promotion of the 23 Research Data Things in Australia being highlighted at that event. In addition to those outputs, so the outputs are effectively, here are things that you can pick up and use. We had a whole series of talks at the plenary about, well, talks from groups who were actually adopting stuff, and I'm not going to go through all of these in detail. We have links at the end that we'll highlight when we get to that point to the videos. If you're all interested in looking at how RDA is making a difference in the activity of particular communities, I strongly encourage you to go to the adoption stories section of the videos, because there you've got people who aren't necessarily infrastructure builders talking about how they're using these outputs to improve either the support that they give to people with disciplines, or the actual work they do themselves. For instance, the data citation of rice, genome data is a strong focus of the interest group and agricultural data at the moment. So rather than try and summarise those, I would encourage you to go to those videos and have a look at those links. Maybe one comment. The data citation working group recommendations have been adopted by quite a few of those adopters, so if you're interested in dynamic data citation, it might be worth having a look at what's been done with those. And some of you may remember, Andrea Saralba gave a talk about that with this year, late last year. He was out in Australia, and we said, great, right before you just come off the plane, here's the shower, and now I'd like you to give a talk. And the recording of that is available from the end's page. Yes, of course, thank you. So that's to give you a sense of some of the activity that happened. We then thought rather than just point you at the websites for these three different events and say, have fun, we thought it might be useful to talk a little bit about some things that we liked. So Stephanie and I will start with things that we found of particular interest at the event, and then we have perspectives from a number of other Australian attendees who will talk about what they liked. So two things that I wanted to highlight. The first was going to be a birds of a feather session called Mapping the Landscape, which was really bringing people together who were interested in the topic of how do we map out all of the different activities that are happening in this area and get a sense of what's going on. And this was something that the hyperactive lesbian I've organized. And over the course of the week, she kept bumping into people who said, oh, we're doing a Mapping the Landscape activity as well. And oh, did you know those people are doing a Mapping the Landscape activity? And so that by Friday, when that session was actually held, it had actually turned into a Mapping the Landscape of Mapping activities. So I was trying to get a sense of who are all of the other people who are trying to do Mapping the Landscapes in various ways. And that for me was a real demonstration of two of the benefits of bringing lots and lots of data nerds together into one space. The first is that you've got lots of people in one spot who you otherwise wouldn't normally see. And I've said in the past that if all of the research data lines did was hold meetings twice a year, that would probably be it. They would get it alone without a value. And the second thing is that you bump into people and you have these serendipitous conversations. So Leslie didn't know a lot about a lot of these things. I didn't know a lot about a lot of these things. And so as a result of these serendipitous interactions, she was able to make that session much better. That group recognized, yet we are all trying to solve similar problems and we need to try and do this in a more coordinated way. And so this is going to be a birds of a feather that's going to turn into an interest group. And the interest group, in fact, there's already, or the proto-interest group, were already starting to think about are there particular tasks that we could spin off as working group activities, which might be precisely the way the RDA process is meant to work. The other thing that I wanted to highlight was a whole session on building a disciplinary world by data infrastructure. This was on the International Data Forum date. And so this was essentially a whole lot of groups reporting on how do we do infrastructure in our discipline and what are the science, in quotes, drivers for it and what are the lessons we've learned. And this was very broad. You can see it's not just hard sciences, it's linguistics and digital humanities. And as a quick way to get a sense of how different disciplines differ in, that's a very good way of doing it. I should also mention in this context the closing keynote for the International Data Forum day by Christine Bergman, who spoke about some early research that her group has been doing, especially on the same thing. We're looking at disciplinary differences around data sharing. There are some huge differences around data sharing and I think it's valuable for us to not just assume that data sharing is the same for everybody and we need to recognise there's a lot of nuance there. Stephanie? Okay. So I'll talk a little bit about two things that I liked. One of which is because my background is in quality of research, I've always been interested in how to share and when to share personal sensitive research data. And I particularly like to talk in one of the SciDataCon sessions on that by Neil Walker who talked about data anonymity and the fact that in many cases data anonymity actually makes data access harder because it looks like it works but it doesn't really and he brought a couple of examples of how and why the anonymisation doesn't work. So for example he had one data set that he mentioned where someone looked at a specific disease and aggregated the data by country. Now in theory that would have been great but for example in France there was just one person, two persons who actually came out of that data set, one was male and one was female. So the identification really didn't work in that case and that's something that I actually find quite interesting. The second thing I like is more a process kind of thing after having had several days of conference where someone stands at the front and talks and everyone in the back sits and listens to what does their email. What I found very refreshing was the interest group for archives and records professionals in RDA which for the second time in a row that I'm aware of actually set up in their breakout session, little breakout sessions. So they made little breakout groups with specific topics and really brainstormed and worked through the issues that they gave us to discuss and I found that a very refreshing and a very much more interactive way and I felt I was contributing way more than in a discussion where you have 30 people in a room and one person says something and the other 29 are listening. So I really enjoyed that and thought that was a very good way of doing this. Now, we have a list of people that have volunteered or have offered when asked to provide their perspectives. Okay, so Malcolm Olson, Griffith Hewney. I guess other than the opportunity to network, the one we're asked to think of something in particular, one of the interest groups I've been involved with for about 18 months is the, calls itself the long tail of research data interest group. We were going to have a meeting at Denver so we decided just to give it some focus, a few of us tabled a document, 10 ways to support the long tail of research but it quickly became apparent that we'd missed the target completely. So the way the meeting, the interest group agenda was we tabled the document and then had 10 two-minute speakers to respond to the document and we had the likes of Christine Borgman, someone from Mendeley and Fig Share. We had a rep from the European Open Science Cloud. So a really wide variety of different senior representatives from different groups, if you like. And as we worked, they went through and gave their two-minute response. Most didn't like what we've written. Not that there was anything wrong with the content but missed the target. The end result was that we should be, if we're targeting funders, we should be thinking about the long tail of research data in terms of orphan data rather than our perspective which is the long tail of research. But I guess the key, the interesting bit I found about the whole exercise was nine or 10 people from a wide variety of international organisations talking for two minutes can come to a pretty quick conclusion about where we should be heading which is very hard to do through an online interest group but also typically other conferences where you only get one or two of those people speaking. You don't actually get them in a room to contribute to a 90-minute discussion on where to from here. So I found that particularly valuable and I don't notice that in many other conferences where you get a lot of broad spectrum from all sides, from institutions, from vendors, from government representatives, from key people like Christine Borgman talking to a particular topic in a practical sense. Thank you very much, Malcolm. That was very interesting. Hamish Holler, are you there? Thank you. Hamish Holler from Griffith University and the Queensland Cyber Infrastructure Foundation. He was fortunate enough to also attend research data reliance in Denver. I actually kind of found it to be quite a good organisation with a good method to both network but also to understand how a lot of the larger collaborative programs, so the sustainability, global sustainability goals, the group of Earth observations, our co-data, our side data and RDA actually worked together to actually promote and formalise best practice and standards and actually to get much greater awareness across this kind of landscape. It was also quite... I also attended a workshop called the... an interest group called the Virtual Research Environments Science Gateways and opportunities for developing a more coordinated approach to interoperability across different systems. This is of particular interest as it provided an international perspective on things that we classify here as virtual laboratories and how in Australia we've been doing and what is the challenges and lessons learned in the international context. Within that session there was... well, there was three speakers, four speakers may have been included, but there was a speaker from Purdue University who was leading the Nano Hub or Hub Zero initiative, which has got about 1.4 million users at the moment, and then there was also a person, Demetrius, that was leading a virtual research environment in the UK. What it was really actually... what was quite interesting is that I think Australia is actually quite organised actually in this approach within virtual laboratories in the infrastructure approach, but sustainability came up as a key issue and how do we actually kind of grow these kind of services, and there was similarities across those international contexts, so there was the approach of expanding vertically quickly to provide that proof of concept and also to show value was universally recognised. You need to also always be justifying your existence and measuring your impacts and measuring impact is not just always about users, but it's about what they do with that and that could be research and government. And also that a strong kind of method that when you're approaching developing these environments is that really you're starting a small enterprise as such. It's not just a program or a platform. You need to think about learning and you need to think about teaching and how you actually integrate this into curriculum and into research practice. A particular note there from HubZero and Nanotech was that they see uptake in learning for their research tools, so in education first. There's been nine-month lag before that actually comes into research despite having a research driven agenda. Just quickly from my perspective, the breadth of topics actually was quite bewildering. Anything from social to biodiversity to health, digital humanities and everything in between. And it was a great networking event and a lot of people attended, so thank you. Okay, thanks so much, Hamish. Yes, it was a bit overwhelming, I think, for all of us in fact. I mean, nearly seven days of this was quite... quite overwhelming. It is possible to have too much page right now. Okay. Thanks very much. Next, Sara, Mr. from ESSA, if you're there. I am here. And yeah, so I'm Sara Disbett. I'm from E-Researchers A in South Australia and just quite grateful to have power at the moment. So I recently became the project lead for the RDS 1.6 Cultures in Community project. So I attended the RDA plenary sort of in that context. So I was particularly interested to sort of find out what the interest groups around the digital practices in history and ethnography and the archives and records professionals was sort of doing and what was happening in those spaces. And Stephanie, I guess, my experience was similar to yours and perhaps my favorite thing was attending that archives and records meeting and just the sort of interactive nature of it and being able to sort of participate actively rather than sort of listening to the participant. So I mean, I sort of broke off into a working group around skills and training for sort of digital skills and training for archives professionals and sort of able to share what some of our plans were in the RDS project and some of the things that we want to achieve in the next phase of the project and really enjoyed that opportunity to sort of like be actively engaged. I also, this was my first RDA plenary and sort of feel like quite a newcomer to this space. So I enjoyed the newcomer session and yeah, I thought it was a very positive experience. I learned a lot and I think what I really wanted to achieve was to sort of improve my understanding of the research data landscape and I think it did that. I think moving forward, I really want to see how the outcomes of the RDS project, how they sort of pan out and how we can feed that back into the archival interest groups. So yeah, so thank you, Anne, for the opportunity. Okay, thanks very much, Sarah. Okay, the next speaker would be Richard Lyons from the Victoria State Government Department and I'm sure I'll forget something. It was jobs, transport, economy, resources, and something else. Richard, if you're there, I've got your slide here. We're from the Department of Economic Development, Jobs, Transport and Resources, so well done, Stephanie. It's a mouthful and we're part of the Agricultural Victoria portfolio. I just reiterate my hands for supporting us in attending the RDA. I found the RDA and both Kieran and I found the RDA a very well-organized, it was an exceptionally well-organized event. It was also really heartening to see so many interest groups trying to grapple with some of the problems that we've been noticing in our closets, if you like, in our work practice in place. And so the sort of pragmatic, practical approach of conversations on a global scale was really something that was outstanding. And so the thing that stood out to me was, for my own particular point of view, is that I attended a number of the sessions, including the archives one, and I too found that really useful. And across the sort of five or six areas that I focused on, we began to be able to build a map of all of the various elements that we're having to grapple with in our work in relation to data management. And so I've mapped that out there just through probably a couple of hours just of thinking and discussing this with a few people. And it is the case that our department actually touches almost all of those areas. So we've got one of the most complex working dynamics that I've ever experienced in my working life. And so we touched just about all of those elements in the matrix. And so it was, and then we also observed the various activities around the enabling features, data management plans, interoperability strategies, and so on. So to be able to put that all together in a bit of a landscape was the most useful thing to me, and we hope to work with a number of our stakeholders to actually create some web resources to link all of these, to provide some, and link to RDA activities in all of those areas over the next six or so months. And we also took into the meetings a very strong interest in archival and records management because of a particular tool that we've invested in the department. And we were exceptionally pleased to notice that that tool seems to be well conceived and for what many of the people are grappling with. So we're very pleased to have that sort of feedback. So I will stop there, I think, and just thank you once again to Ann's. Thanks so much, Richard. Kieran Murphy, also from the department, did you want to add something? Yes. Definitely. Andrew, thanks again and just echo Richard's thanks to Ann's for the support to head over to the conference. It was certainly, I'd want to say it's the best event I've been to in my professional time here at the department in ten years, maybe selfishly because it's very much right down the problems that Richard said we've been grappling with and I was a little bit concerned before we left, you know, with some of the, you know, the world we're in and going there with the quality of the speakers and presentations there that could have been a little bit over my head, but it was right down the alley and we've got so much from it. So thanks very much to Ann's for the support. Just a really practical example, you know, obviously the newcomers for RDA session was really valuable to go there and I think Stephanie Moore said there was, there might have been 60 people at that session, or 60, 80, so it looks that the RDA model is growing. There's a lot of new people there. So basically being a newcomer and then participating in the events during the week and all the breakouts, obviously, really excited to go along to things such as the, you know, an emerging interest group in agile data curation, which is a really data curation, is a high priority capability area that we're focusing on in our area and I know we're called the big long name but we also are a branch, we're a division called Agriculture Victoria so whilst we're representing digital our interests are in the agriculture sector but obviously the lessons we've learned there will be spread further across the department. So just probably, I've got a lot of notes, I've actually only just landed back in the office today. I took a few days off since when I got back from the US because Richard and I extended our visit to University of Illinois and post-Denver so that was really valuable because the learnings from Denver got supported and I guess furthered in what we worked out in the university and the context there. So I'll have some time together and my thoughts and put together our report and we're happy to share that with everyone but as Richard said, it really does align to the problems we've been grappling with, the product that we've, the tool that we've developed in the last few years which was very well received over there and we hope we can contribute that to the Australian landscape in whatever shape or form and I'm sure we'll be doing that through ends but practical take home is around that the working groups and the interest groups in agile data curation has emerging interest group which I've joined and then the working groups that reported on that are really relieved to see some artwork that the commons and the fair principles have created. So I might go on too much longer. Stephanie, thanks for giving us a chance to catch up. Thanks, June and maybe we can talk about, say, if you wanted to present your report as a blog post or something like that we could help you with that. Okay, and Anita, how are you doing? Yes, hi everyone. I again am getting feedback. I think it's better now, no, it's improved. Yes, so thanks again to Anne's for contribution towards going to the sessions. In fact, if it wasn't there, I'm from Tern Ecoinformatics at the University of Adelaide and mainly work on the ECOS portal and also the shared data submission tool. And we're basically on subsistence money so it was really important to visit. And for me, I guess in terms of what we do here, I'm in the data sort of publishing realm and I guess my role is trying to merge or bring together publishing policies in a way that really reflect long established science practice. And I've been reading a lot about the co-data recommendations and papers and that and also the RDA recommendations. So it was absolutely fabulous to actually get there and see how these two groups work together collegially to sort of guide us in an international sphere in this area. So that was really important to participate in that. I was kind of like a kid in a candy shop. There were so many things that I could have gone to of interest. But the one that really stood out for me and it was mentioned in Simon Cox's talk in the plenary but also was mentioned in quite a few other sessions. And this is the notion of trustworthiness of the data that is published openly in repositories and things like that and how the recommendations that are coming through in terms of principles and guidelines through the RDA, from the various working groups may well give some kind of basis for working out or identifying the levels of trustworthiness in terms of our infrastructure. So that had huge implications for the kind of systems, the infrastructure that Tern has and it really overflowed in a whole range of areas. It came through in terms of ontologies and generalities you could have in ontologies in terms of control vocabs it came through and it also came through in this whole notion of reproducibility and the different like I hadn't realized there were three levels of reproducibility or three types of reproducibility so that was absolutely fascinating. Going forward, I guess from a Tern perspective it would be really great to use some of our infrastructure as case studies for the next lot of working group activities, particularly in the publishing data services and in that space we'd really like to be involved in that. And it's good to feel that you're not alone in thinking about these things. It was really great. Thank you. And also it's the location, the organization. It was just brilliant. It was a really well run, well run sort of week. Thanks to everyone. Thanks very much Anita. And yes, thanks again to all our contributors for their insights. So we do have a bit of time for questions at this point. We thought we should provide you with some information where you can go and look further. So there was a quite an active conference in terms of tweeting under a number of different hashtags, hash IDW 2016 and hash RDA plenary for the plenary event. For those of you that are looking at the hash IDW 2016 hashtag now and wondering why there are so many tweets about deafness, it's because after we ran our event there was international deafness week for 2016 and we got a hashtag collision. But the archive that's listed on the screen there, please don't try and memorize that. It will be in the slides which will be available after the session on the ANDS events page. But that just captured the tweets for these events. The programs themselves online with links to the presentations. So if you download the slides or the slides you can, there's also videos for much of the material, not however the breakout sessions for the actual research data reliance plenary, only for the sessions that were happening in the main room. Much of the work of RDA as you've heard already happens in working groups and interest groups and these were in 8 parallel tracks or something like that. And so there isn't video from those, but there's certainly video from the main space. And most of the groups that help the breakout sessions have material either being from the program or from their group pages. And finally there's some blog posts that are being aggregated together. They currently sit on the codator at the moment or the codator at all websites. But there's blog posts for a whole range of people including RDA people that's simply being used to a point to pull them together. So lots of additional information for people to go and look at if they want. So, having said that, Suzanna. All right, thank you, yes. Stephanie has reminded me that too much RDA is barely enough to quote Roy and HG and if you would like more information on RDA, Stephanie and I are running two bots at E-Research. One is essentially on why you might want to use the Research Data Reliance to solve particular data problems. So you've heard already today for a number of people about how they got value out of the RDA experience and process in realizing other people tackling the same problems. We're running a bot that will help you understand how you can get more involved in RDA in terms of building solutions. And then the second bot is focused on how you might adopt some of those outputs that we talked about at the start of this webinar. So if you're interested in either of those, they'll be on at the E-Research conference if you're coming to that. And bearing in mind that RDA has produced quite a few more outputs than the ones that were presented at this particular plenary because the plenary output sessions only talk about outputs that are either presented for the first sort of plan out where working groups finish and present their outputs at this plenary or where they are going to be finishing in the next six months and will be presenting their final outputs at the next plenary. So on the RDA website, there is a page under outputs and recommendations called all outputs and recommendations, I think. And then you'll find a list of probably over a dozen at this point. Okay, so Suzanna, has anyone typed any questions in chat? Actually, no. Okay, well, so if no one has any questions, this is your last chance. Oh, no, actually, no one's got any. Here we go. What do you think of the priorities for ANZ in the follow-up? The follow-up to International Data Week. I guess the priority, well, I don't know if I can speak for ANZ as a whole. I can certainly speak personally, and I should explain that Stephanie and I, we work for ANZ, but in a sense, we work for RDA as well. Stephanie, I think, literally works for RDA as their Director of Operations three days a week, and I work in air quotes for RDA as Co-Chair of the Technical Advisory Board. And so I suppose, well, do you want to give your answer first and then I'll give my answer? Okay, so my answer would be really very much in line with the slide that's on the screen at the moment. I would like to see more Australians using the RDA processes to solve data problems, so more involvement in working groups and interest groups. The fact that more people from Australia were coming to this event was great. The positive stories that we've heard today were also great. I'd like to see more Australians involved in using RDA and not just in running it. And then the second thing I guess that I'd like to see from an ANS perspective is more adoption of the outputs. So if you may have heard Rhys Francis in the past talk about how Australia should be not trying to reinvent the wheel all the time in the research infrastructure, we should be adopting what's happening overseas. RDA is a great place to go to look for things that you can adopt. Data Citation, Stephanie mentioned, is just one example of that. So more people involved in solving problems through RDA and more people involved in picking out outputs would be an answer. Yeah, so more people in Australia getting benefits out of the research data lines is I guess how we could summarize that. And part of why we are doing those first and final sessions at your research is because not everybody knows a lot about the research data lines. We just want to make sure that more people have a chance of hearing about it and hearing what it can do for you really and how you can help it as well. So it can be a win-win situation. As the RDA Director of Operations, I have a strongly internal role, so at the moment I'm actually trying to make sure that some of the processes within the research data lines work more smoothly. So that is my priority following up from International Data Week, which has nothing to do really with the outward reaching phase of RDA but more with making sure that people actually can use the research data lines and can get benefit from it by making sure the organization works smoothly. I'm just wondering if RDA website collaboration for OSF website the working group I joined was using OSFOS. As in OSF.io. So the OSF.io, if I understand the question correctly, OSF.io is a hosted platform for research collaboration. You can think of it as being a little bit like a light form of a virtual laboratory, although it's mostly focused on managing data rather than on integration with tools. You could use it for some of the kind of collaborative activity that the RDA also supports, but the intention of the research data reliance website is basically to do two things. The first is to provide information about what RDA is and how it's structured and what it does and its outputs as Stephanie has already identified. But there's a second if you like once you log in as a registered RDA member and anyone can become an RDA member for free. Once you log in and join particular groups, each of those groups have their own space with mailing lists and wikis and file repositories that they can use to manage their own processes and outputs. One of the reasons that some people decide to use the RDA system is simply because it gives them all of that collaboration infrastructure for free. I hope I answered what I think the question was. Maybe just to add one thing. As Andrew said, the RDA website of course also has the purpose of showing information on the RDA, and we also have requests for comments open normally, so that means on the RDA website you can find documents that are currently under what we call community review and where we actively ask the community to provide comments. For that purpose, the RDA website is a central point to do so. I think one of the priorities for other institutions in Australia is to participate more in the review of the outputs before they become outputs. They're published on the RDA website. I guess what we're looking for is feedback on whether, well how practical their recommendations are and whether they can be adopted within your institution. Even if it's a good comment or a negative comment, constructive criticism, it would be useful, because no comment doesn't give you a good direction whether it's a good recommendation or not, so the more feedback about the outputs that are up for community review the better. I'd like to see more Australians involved with that process. That's a great point now, Malcolm. I was taking a slightly parochial tab focus on things rather than thinking broadly, more broadly. I should emphasise the incredibly valuable role that the organisational assembly members play in RDA, because they're the people who are working in organisations that are going to be adopting the outputs. So their role in the RDA process is extremely important. Any other questions, Suzanna? There's another one. It says is there a particular place for the draft outputs? Is that the question? Yes, is there a particular page for these draft outputs? There's the outputs page. Yes, so on the one hand there's the outputs page which is under outputs and recommendations all outputs and recommendations. That's a list of outputs. The first set is endorsed outputs, which means they're the ones that have already gone through the review process. We have recommendations currently being endorsed or something like that. Hang on, let's just have a look. What's it actually called? Recommendations with RDA endorsement in process and they're the ones that we actually really like those comments on. And we do highlight some of these in the request for comments box. Once the recommendations have been formally submitted to RDA for consideration, they end up in the request for comments box and that's when we really, really, really want community comments. And also comments from the organization members that are presented by the organization because what we're trying to determine is whether these outputs are actually useful to anyone, to real people, not just in theory. A fit for purpose. A fit for purpose and also yet adoptable with reasonable amount of effort. If you go to rd-alliance.org right up at the top of the screen there's the words recommendations and outputs and that will let you get to that. Okay, there's one more question which says what has been discussed in Denver about the facilities for developing countries? So I can point to a couple of things. One was as I mentioned the RDA summer schools. It's got a particular focus on improving the standard of education in data issues for researchers from developing countries. There was a keynote from one of the RDA council members K.A. Raza Roka from Botswana talking not just about issues relating to Botswana but about data issues ranging across the whole of the African continent and the other thing I point out is that although RDA is currently the RDA membership is drawn primarily from Western Europe and the United States consciously working to expand that out and so we have an increasing number of members from South America and in fact at this election the current technical advisory board election which is closing real soon now one of the candidates is from India so we are starting to broaden out the geographical base for RDA which from my point of view is extremely welcoming. And one of the adoption stories that was presented at the RDA was the one about rice. They were working with people in the Philippines. The International Rice Research Institute is the leader of the interest group on agricultural industries from Brazil Argentina. So the agricultural cluster of interest in working groups actually has a better involvement with geographical spread. So they become Adali who is from India she is one of the top candidates she is also heavily involved in the agricultural interest group for example. It is sort of natural that not so much Africa I don't think. Okay we have another question which says CoData RDA Research Data Science Summer School will it happen in Australia? If not, why? I have no idea. Can I answer that one? No, sure. So this was something we've been talking with Simon from CoData and Simon Hodson and Cusif and just trying to get ahead around what's the difference between what CoData offers as a summer school and what we offer already in Australia and things like software carpentry. I think we're looking at all the carpentry and some of the sub-components. The thing about the CoData especially the one in Trieste it's a three week summer school and they did target a lot of a lot of the participants were funded from various sources from developing countries. So I guess our last conversation around this topic with Cusif is will people really turn up for a three week conference in Brisbane or Melbourne or is it better offered in shorter modules and if they're in shorter modules where we already run software carpentry so what are the missing elements? So definitely like the curriculum's open there's some parts of the curriculum they offer that we have big gaps in especially around visualisation and probably some of the HPC machine learning stuff but I suspect that there's courses around Australia online that are already meeting that need as well so probably to reiterate an earlier problem why we wouldn't want to reinvent the wheel if there is some good programmes already available so it's a matter of I guess trying to decide do we want a summer school or get more managed or focused or get a coherent group of courses together under a banner if that makes sense but definitely the CoData sorry to say the CoData Open Curriculum especially if you can find the one at TRIEST is quite interesting to have a look at. I'll put the link where the materials are deposited into the slides as well and I should also make the point that the developers of the curriculum for the RDA summer school were talking closely with David Flanders about the links with the RESBAS curriculum and I believe there's significant overlap between the RESBAS curriculum and the summer school curriculum so in a sense much of the material that was covered has already been offered in Australia through the RESBAS vehicle we're over time so I think we might wrap it up there thank you all for attending thanks in particular to the Australian attendees who provided their perspective on the event the slides including those links will be available on the events page real soon now and thanks for coming in enjoy the rest of your day