 Can I ask everyone to sit down and we begin. Thank you very much for everybody who interoperated in the Interoperability Groups. So it's been a long day. We've had a lot and a lot of information to digest, but it's been productive, that's the feeling I've got. raised issues, but that's what we're here to do is raise issues and discuss things which we've got to discuss in the next minute. here to do is raise issues and discuss things. So we're going to start with a summary of the breakout groups. If I could ask the first Jochen to report on the literature guidelines group. Thank you. So we had a lot of very useful feedback. First of all we went to make clear that we have we open air provides a set of guidelines which may have different versions. So we say literature guidelines now have version three and the other two for data increase version one. For the literature guidelines we have defined a roadmap. So there are two steps. We want to finalize the current draft you already received in next month. We very much appreciate your feedback and we want to revise the driver guidelines as a second step and so we will publish the final version of the literature guidelines in a version three dot x in the summer. Again first step finalization of 3.0 so that new repositories can come and register in the merged open air driver portal and the second step is a complete finalized revised version with the format driver guidelines in the summer. Feedback on the current draft there are a lot of a lot a number of typos we need to fix. Then we got from Pablo some feedback about other initiatives in the UK. Just to mention the RIOX initiative and vocabularies for open access. They are somehow very specific to the situation in UK and they also define our identifiers for funding a project information. So for open air that will mean that we will not harvest individual repositories from them from the UK but from their repository network as an aggregator. Another interesting point was that open air can also harvest from the open air compliant pure system which can also act as an aggregator for a number of repositories. Then we discussed some possible improvements for instance that at the moment we have only identifiers to a splash page of a publication but it would be very useful also that we can have a link to the full text payload which might be needed for text mining operations. Then we had a short discussion. Is it useful to indicate the version of the paper mainly is it peer reviewed or not. Something which we follow in next discussions because we had different opinions about it. Then with some remarks that we should improve the introduction of the guidelines so to widen the scope not only to EC funded project results to make it more global because then it would allow that this kind of guidelines can also be adopted in other parts of the world and it would be interesting to provide an introduction that is not too technical but of interest for decision makers for instance. Last but not least it was the idea to provide monitoring tools for guidelines compliance. Just I think that I think it was mentioned. I think it's important to bear in mind when we plan to merge the driver and the driver guidelines. The global usage of the driver guidelines outside the European borders so we need to consider this extra European impact of the driver guidelines and when doing the new version of the guidelines we need to consider and to have that in mind that this is not be only used on the context of Europe of the European repositories but wider for instance now in Latin America the driver guidelines are being uptake and it's and it's also good on that on the perspective that what we are doing here will should connect with other initiatives outside of Europe so we really need to take this into consideration. Any other observations on that from participants? Okay thank you young let's move on to the next group plus in the data group as well so first of all I think we were confirmed in that data site is the right standard to go with so many repositories already exporting in data site or is planning to do it so that's a good part about it also that of course the standard has certain issues that there's been a lot of trade-offs between granularity and ease of use so for instance it would be nice if you could link to specify if you're linking to a landing page or the resource itself for the data resource itself then we were around where to actually draw the line of what to include in OpenAir that we're saying that we only want to include data sets that are related to documents but then that might make data sets be felt like they're second-class citizens so the conclusion is that we have to start somewhere and this is just the first first step and and what we am really interested in is the the linking and the search ability of the metadata that we are including and then we can expand later on then we were around along the same lines which kind of requirements we have for inclusion of repositories if we're just gonna take everything so that perhaps we need some kind of data use some kind of data registry like we have for for literature repositories with OpenDoor so that we have some kind of confirmation of the repository that we can harvest them then we were a bit around the verifiability of the data that DUI give some certain level of trust in what is actually being linked to whereas for instance a URL doesn't really provide the same trust and there was a lot of more discussion about this but for instance there are some certain big data repositories that's basing their persistent identifiers on your ends and that we have feel that we that we need to be inclusive and not exclusive in that sense then we were also around the nature of the dynamic data and all the the issues that are surrounding the dynamic nature and how you're linking to it the data might move around between between repositories or repositories may provide you with the different information and how can we actually verify verify these issues also that the data changes can change all the time depending on the repository and so forth so what we should do there is that we should it's again we have to start someplace and we should encourage the best practices and make sure that if people cited in the papers then they should also we should encourage them to really make it retrievable in the same form that it's made that we're using it in then we were around the relationships that in the data side meet today's a schema that relationships are very generic and that in our guidelines we perhaps need to be more specific about exactly which kind of relationship that we're interested in and also not a mob for Pandora's box of what we are gonna harvest from the data repositories yeah and then we were around the licensing and funding as well but that was not where the biggest issue were it was more less adequate that some repositories they can provide funding information and others they they can't you have anything to add no I mean it raised the session was interesting it raised a lot of difficult issues about big data data-driven science how we're going to handle all of that and I think we have to start small and we have to be realistic about what we're going to achieve and over there plus and to pilots in case studies with the people we've invited today for example it's very valuable feedback so that's you have to move down here now if you want to see this so as we didn't have anything to discuss in the way that we didn't have a guideline that we have prepared that we can discuss our discussion was very high-level but it was also very concrete and practical in the way that we have a roadmap now for what to do in the coming months so what we want to do is we want to present a draft application profile for sheriff XML for open air which should be presented at the Euracris membership meeting in Bonn on the 13th and 14th of May so if you're interested in this I don't know if is it open for everyone to to participate at the membership meeting or do you need to yes so it's open for everyone so so be aware when and if you're interested in this to participate so the first thing we want to do is to make an open wiki where we will put our draft application profile in which members of Euracris and open air will work out together and we will present this as an open invitation to the vendors of Chris systems I just name three of them here I don't know how many there are but Avida, Simplatec and Tira, they are major ones and of course that should sort of scrutinize review the work that we've done in the draft and come out with a better version of the application profile that we can then present at the open air meeting in sorry the membership the Euracris membership meeting on the 13th and 14th of May so this is the plan for now I'm not going to go into much details about this didn't really go into any further details about what should be done in that way in a sense but I'll also write some mini-example meeting that I'll send to all who are participating. Thank you. Thank you very much. I don't know how relevant what we discussed is to larger audience because we were really on a practical level so we have a new checklist what national open access desks should be doing and we discussed it. We have a draft template to track achievements and we briefly discuss it and then we have a sample country action plan which we discussed and it was agreed that minimum required efforts from the North would be to present some achievements by the end of March and then every three months maximum required effort would be to present achievements the day before we have our monthly regional calls and another topic we discussed was communication with member states meaning policymakers, ministries, research funders in the member states because that's an area that we should be exploring more deeply and one of the reasons why we should be exploring it more deeply because Council of Europe is organizing a high level meeting on the 18th of February where ministers of science and education will attend and we'll have to answer three questions about open access developments in their countries and in Europe in general and we were talking how we as North could provide help to the ministries who don't feel competent enough in answering those three questions they will have to answer next week. Then Gwen presented our next Open Air Plus workshop in Ghent which will be about linking publications and data but it will be from librarian's perspective what competencies are required from librarians when they are starting designing their data management plans and linking publications and data etc. So if you are interested make sure to talk to Gwen and get more details about this event and other issues discussed we were talking how we could expand open access, access tracker to cover all open air plus countries and we'll keep talking. Then it would be good to have a list of open data policies from European countries and perhaps maybe even wider because that's something we might find useful when we talk about introducing institutional, national open data policies. Then it would be good to have a list of data repositories from the countries and the good place would be to update country pages on the open air portal with this information some already provided this, some will provide soon. Then we spoke that perhaps Open Air Plus could be an source of expertise for institutions or countries that plan some new open data projects and one way is to refer all the questions you received to Nigelaw to regional coordinators or perhaps we could have something like online resource updated all the time where all those good practices, recommendations etc. are collected. I guess that's it. I'm not missing anything. Thank you. Anyone have any questions from the group or extra observations? Thank you. So maybe I hand over to Norbert now. But again it's really not the time I think to give a comprehensive summary of what you just heard before because these were all summaries already of the day. I think it's perhaps more important maybe to just highlight from a more high level perspective and to remind us what the mission of Open Air is. And that became more and more clear to me not only today but also over the last day and that is what started in 2009 as a policy supporting infrastructure for the open access pilot of the European Commission. It's now being transferred to a comprehensive scientific information infrastructure that covers all types of research output and research related and research and teaching related material that is of relevance. And what we covered here in menu have been publications, research data, Chris systems and also journals and we have publishers as well. How complex is this? Perhaps I can make this clear to you if I just mentioned all the organizations and initiatives I'm personally involved and try to coordinate throughout the year and I don't think that this will inclusive but I guess it mentions the most important one of course beyond Open Air, Open Air Plus from the European Commission. It's Icordi as you have heard and the research data alliance. It's core with the international perspective of it. It's Libre for research libraries. It's a G8 and O5 data working group that will meet on the 4th of March in the UK again to discuss with not only with European states but also with the five outreach countries China, Brazil and so on about data infrastructure if you like. This is an attempt to get the research data alliance together with initiatives in other parts of the world to agree on kind of standards and interoperability is always a key issue. Then we have, and not to forget, a plesora, a diversity of disciplines, scientific disciplines and we had the report from the British Atmospheric Data Centre. I attended an October meeting, a rather small scale meeting at Hingston close to Cambridge organised by the European Bioinformatics Institute about linking literature to data and many publishers like Nature and PLOS and BioMed Central and so on were present and representatives from the European Modicula Biology Organization. So both publishers and scientists, again a lot of the discussions and topics that were presented here about data journals, linking articles to data, what are the right standards for accession numbers to data sets is discussed in this group. We heard also examples from archaeology. In parallel we have on the European Commission site 48 European research infrastructure projects so discipline-based research infrastructure project as well. And then just to make it a bit more complex we have the discussions in our member states and that was just alluded to by Irina as well how important it is to get those initiatives and infrastructures like OpenAir connected to the established systems and communication schemers of member states with the European Commission and vice versa which is not so easy because in our countries we have all different systems how research and representation at the European Commission and research funding is organised and just speaking for my own country in Germany it's difficult enough to keep an overview of what's going on with all the ministries and research funders that are there. So finding a right name to address in the ministry that is responsible for a topic like this is not an easy task and we all need to do this in our countries and we tried to provide support through this from the Commission site but still it's a challenge. Then we have infrastructure funders like JISC, Neo Jacobs was also here I guess he has already gone, the DFG in Germany, Knowledge Exchange and many others in your countries as well. And then last but not least but that becomes more and more apparent to me now being responsible for university as well as when we sit here together and talk about interoperability and have an interoperability workshop we all know what we are talking about. If you go back to your institution be it a university, be it a research organisation and you try to address the topic of interoperability with your presidential board, with the governing board of a university, talk to your researchers who are, I mean just researchers but not involved in infrastructure, they will often not understand what you mean with interoperability and what the issues are and what the problems are because everything is digital so what is the problem. So you can just deal it. So this really adds to the complexity and makes clear how important it is to get all the communities that were here represented. So the publication, the data, the Chris systems and your journals, publishers as well and to have committed people like those who have come together here in Minyoo to drive this forward because otherwise it will never end and we are only a fraction of all the communities that I mentioned before to get there. So sometimes I'm a bit afraid but only a bit whether we can manage this on a European and then it goes beyond to the international and global level. On the other hand I must say it's quite a challenge and it's interesting as well to work on those topics and knowing so many committed colleagues here from all different fields it's a very good feeling to go ahead. That's actually perhaps closing now with two, I mean for me I see two main strands for open air forward in the communities here. One is really the existing infrastructure that is already operational with open air to carry on to expand in Horizon 2020 and the various aspects have been raised over the last days. And the second strand is to connect to all the initiatives and projects that have been represented here. I mentioned the majority of them. UDAT is another one of course and ICORLY and all the others. So really creating some kind of umbrella or platform fundament to connect all these initiatives to come together in a way that is flexible and loosely enough to respond to specific needs in communities. On the other hand to make it understandable and comprehensive in a way that funders like the European Commission or on a wider level, international level they will understand what we are talking about instead of talking to 50 or 100 different people from different communities. So I guess that perhaps should serve as a final wrap up as a conclusion. I use the opportunity again like I did yesterday to thank Eloy and Pedro and Ricardo and all the other colleagues for a wonderful organisation here. I mean we had such a great dinner also yesterday with ad hoc music presentations coming up as well I guess which was really really nice. Yesterday night we have those of you who will join us, have a wonderful tour and our social programme tour ahead of us. So thank you very much Eloy again and for our team for a great workshop and conference here. Thank you. Eloy, do you have some organisational perhaps?