[DDI-SRG] DDI Poster proposal accepted at Dublin Core 2008 conference

[Joachim Wackerow]

Today I got the answer that this proposal is accepted. The conference is 
in Berlin September 26-28. http://dc2008.de/

The reviewer comments (4) are included in the email. I think they are 
quite interesting regarding DDI in general. The proposal is attached as 
well.

Some mentioned topics in the reviewer comments are probably to think 
about respectively to have answers to related questions
- collaboration between DC and DDI
- "closed XML-based modularization", not RDF
- relationship to Open Archives Initiative Object Reuse and Exchange 
standard

Any comments on what to include in the poster or on the reviewer notes 
are very welcome.

Achim

Proposal in separate email, because of earlier problems

--------------


The DC-2008 Program Committee has now completed the review of your
submission titled "The Data Documentation Initiative (DDI)." The Committee's
decision is to accept your poster for the poster session in Berlin and for
publication in the proceedings.

We have included below the text of the reviewer comments on your poster.
The Committee will be sending you an email very soon with further
instructions on preparing your poster for publication in the proceedings.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Jane Greenberg at
janeg at email.unc.edu.
------------------------------------------------------
Reviewer A:
A well written poster abstract about the metadata standard used within the
social sciences

It is valuable to hear about related metadata standards in particular
disciplines. It would be good to encourage some collaboration between DC and
DDI, and to introduce a social science community to DCMI.

It would be useful to be clearer about the DC metadata used for citation
purposes. Does this follow the DC recommendations for bibliographic
citations? In fact, there is currently no recommendation for DC citations in
XML.

------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------
Reviewer B:
The poster is timely since the DDI Aliance will be voting on the DDI 3.0
schema near the close of April.  DDI 3.0 represents a major advancement for
DDI in that it incorporates XML Schema and more closely aligns with the data
life cycle.  It should be of interest to DCMI conference participants
describing data sets.  While Dublin Core is not used as the primary citation
mechanism...a DC "module" is included to support applications which
understand the Dublin Core XML, but which do not understand DDI.

------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------
Reviewer C:
Given that DDI 3.0 is being released this year, a poster at the DC 2008
conference would provide useful visibility to this new specification. Given
the brevity allowed for a poster submission, the technical details give a
basic sense of what might be addressed by the actual poster.

As a suggestion for possible revision, the author may consider removing the
first paragraph (which seems to serve as an abstract) since the short
proposal is intended to be an extended abstract. You might state more
specifically what the poster itself will present.

------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------
Reviewer D:
The poster presents the current version of the DDI standard, a XML format
for the exchange of documentation for datasets in the social and behavioral
sciences. The standard aims covering the complete data life-cycle from
generation to preservation, distribution, application, and reuse.

Given the limited space of a one page poster abstract, the text outlines
the features of DDI in enough depth to make people interested in the work.

In addition to naming the institutions that contributed to defining the
standard, it would also be interesting to give examples of institutions and
application domains where the standard is already used.

Seen from a technical perspective, I was surprised to see that the DDI is
build on a rather closed XML-based modularization approach. It would thus be
interesting to hear, why the working group decided on this approach and did
not build the standard on a more flexible, better extendable data model like
RDF.

It would also be interesting to know how the effort relates to the new Open
Archives Initiative Object Reuse and Exchange standard
(http://www.openarchives.org/ore/) and if both standards could profit from
being aligned more closely.

------------------------------------------------------
________________________________________________________________________
DC 2008 Editorial Team


DCMI Proceedings
http://www.dcmipubs.org/ojs/index.php/pubs