Standard Process (up to July 2012)
Introduction
The First Session of the IODE/JCOMM Forum on Oceanographic Data
Management and Exchange Standards was held at the IOC Project Office
(IODE-PO) for IODE, Oostende, Belgium between 21 and 25 January 2008.
The meeting was organized because of the recognition that although there
were mechanisms to help coordinate ocean data exchange, these had not
resulted in the degree of agreement on a wide range of matters that are
needed in order to allow the easy exchange and interoperability of data
collected. This meeting was to initiate discussions on a limited set of
topics for which it was felt that broad agreement was possible. A second
objective was to discuss and if possible determine a way to establish
an internationally recognized process for submitting proposed standards
and their acceptance by the ocean community. The information contained
in this document presents the results of those discussions.
The standards that are produced by this process are intended primarily
for the use of the marine meteorological and oceanographic community. If
they have wider applicability, they may be submitted to appropriate
international standards bodies, such as ISO. However, after
recommendation, their use will be widely encouraged within IOC and WMO.
Process description
The overall process is presented in figure 1. There are a number of
steps in the process and a number of individuals and groups that have
roles to play. These individuals and groups, and their roles and
responsibilities are described here and in Appendix A.
Much of the activity related to submission and approval of the standard
will take place electronically. There will be face to face meetings of
the team responsible for guiding submissions through the process, but
approval is not tied to this meeting schedule.
The process from submission through evaluation may result in a
recommended standard for IOC and WMO member/member states. Documentation
of the proposal and comments generated through the review will be
available through a web site.
The entire process is intended to be limited to a maximum of no more
than 8 months. Although the timing described in this document should
result in a decision more quickly than this, there may be some time
expended in identifying individuals to take part in the review.
There are expected to be circumstances of proposals sufficiently well
prepared and tested or of an application of an existing international
standard. In these cases, there is a fast track process that can be
taken. The determination of whether the proposal meets fast tracking
criteria occurs early and allows for a more rapid determination of
suitability.
Polling of individuals and member/member states is an important part of
the process. It is through such polling that it will be clear if there
is wide spread support for a proposal. Polling will be conducted
electronically, with a set period for response. No response will be
interpreted as unopposed.
Step 1: Submission of a proposal
A proposal to be presented to the IODE / JCOMM Standards Process can be
prepared by any group within IODE and JCOMM, and by any member / member
state of IOC and WMO. In addition, other groups that have interests in
the management of marine meteorological and oceanographic data may
submit proposals for consideration.
The scope of proposals should be related to collection, management and
exchange of marine meteorological and oceanographic data between IOC and
WMO member / member states. The emphasis is on improving the
interoperability of data. As such, this would include:
- Developing vocabularies that permit unambiguous and machine processable data and information descriptions.
- Methods that encourage the convergence from multiple solutions to a problem, to fewer, more robust solutions
- Well tested methods for managing data or information that if widely used would provide greater consistency in treatment.
- Methods that can be used widely in the marine meteorological and oceanographic community.
In order for a proposal to be considered, it must be prepared using the template provided
Proposals should be submitted to the IOC PROJECT OFFICE FOR IODE (IODE-PO)
(This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.). They will be placed on the appropriate pages of the standards process web site maintained by the IODE-PO.
Step 2: Internal Review
The purpose of this step is to ensure that the proposal is complete and
fully informative of what is being proposed. If information is lacking
or the proposal is unclear, the proponent will be contacted and provided
with comments about what changes are deemed necessary.
The internal review will be initiated by the IODE PO by sending a copy
to members of the joint IODE/JCOMM Expert Team on Data Management
Practices (ETDMP). Members will read the proposal and respond with
comments within 15 days of notification. This review will examine the
proposal and consider such questions as:
a. Is the purpose of the standard well defined and clear?
b. Is their sufficient detail in the proposal to allow for an expert review?
c. Is the proposal clearly written and complete?
d. Are there any obvious weaknesses?
e. Is there another competing potential standard that has equal merit?
f. Does this proposal address a pressing issue at this time?
g. Can the standard be applied widely by the IOC and WMO member / member states?
h. Is the proposal suitable for a fast track approach? Criteria to consider include:
i. Has the submission come from a formal group responsible for managing data affected by the proposal?
ii. Does the proposal recommend circumstances for the application of an existing standard?
iii. Is it likely that the appropriate members for the technical
internal review will come from the same group that submit the proposal?
Responses will be collated by the IODE-PO based on above-mentioned
structure, and reviewed by the chair of ETDMP. Based on comments
received, the proponent will either receive notification that the
proposal will be moved to âsubmittedâ status, will receive the collated
comments of the internal review so that the proposal can be amended,
notified that the proposal will not be considered at this time, or the
proposal will be fast tracked.
Proposals that meet criteria for fast tracking (Appendix C_(to be completed)) will be moved directly to âProposedâ status.
The proponents whose proposal requires changes will be given 15 days to
respond with an amended proposal. If not met, the submission will be
dropped from further consideration. If met, the proposal will once again
go through internal review and either receive support to proceed or be
dropped.
The comments will be placed on the appropriate pages of the standards
process web site maintained by the IODE-PO and associated with the
proposal. The outcome of the review will be clearly indicated.
Step 3: Expert Review
Moving a proposal to Expert Review changes its status to âSubmittedâ.
The first action is taken by the ETDMP. They must identify and recruit
members of the expert team to examine the proposal. Members may be drawn
from ETDMP itself, or may be requested from other groups of IODE and
JCOMM. In some circumstances, team members may be drawn from outside
these organizations, to be sure adequate technical background is
available.
The ETDMP must then work with the expert team to develop appropriate
criteria for the review. These will be used to guide the discussions.
The IODE-PO will establish an on-line forum for discussions of the
expert team. This forum will be password protected and discussions will
not be made public.
ETDMP will designate a âModeratorâ for the review. This person may be a
member of ETDMP or just of the expert team. Their role is to guide the
review forward, ensuring that all discussions reach a conclusion and
consensus is reached as possible.
The review should be conducted as expeditiously as possible. During the
course of the review, the expert team, through the Moderator, may
contact the proponent to clarify aspects. These exchanges should be
minimized since if they become too frequent, it is an indication that
the proposal has not been written clearly enough.
The Moderator should provide a brief monthly report to the chair of
ETDMP. This report should summarize progress in the review and indicate
what is left to do. The Moderator may poll expert team members at any
time to determine if the proposal should pass to âProposedâ status. If
the proposal achieves at least 75% support of respondents, the Moderator
will propose to the chair of ETDMP that the proposal status be changed
to âProposedâ.
At the end of 3 months, if no decision has been reached by the expert
team, a poll of expert team members will be taken. If there is
sufficient support of members that favour the proposal the
recommendation will go to the chair of ETDMP to move the proposal to
âProposedâ status.
If support is insufficient, the chair of the expert team will write a
review of the discussions and provide this to ETDMP. These comments will
go back to the proponent who will be given a period of 1 month to
address the technical shortcomings. The revisions will be passed back to
the expert team, to judge and make a decision. If not enough support is
garnered in a subsequent poll, the chair of the expert team will
summarize the shortcomings and report to the chair of ETDMP. The chair
of ETDMP will notify the proponent, provide the report to them and
invite them to revise and resubmit the proposal.
At the end of this step, the IODE-PO will close the internal forum and
archive the discussions. The ETDMP will dissolve the expert team used in
the internal review.
The comments will be placed on the appropriate pages of the standards
process web site maintained by the IODE-PO and associated with the
proposal. The outcome of the review will be clearly indicated.
Step 4: Community Review
Moving a proposal to Community Review changes the status to âProposedâ.
This stage opens discussions up for wide community comment.
At this step the IODE-PO will undertake the following actions
a. It will open a public, on-line forum for discussion of the proposal.
b. It will use methods such as Circular Letters, emails, notices on
web pages and other communications means to notify the public that the
standard has been proposed.
c. It will provide the login information and invite comments for a period of 3 months.
d. It will invite interested parties to experiment with the proposed standard to assist in evaluating its utility.
The ETDMP will appoint a Moderator to guide the public discussion. In
most cases, this would be the same person who played this role for the
internal review, since they will know the previous discussions and so
will be able to short cut discussions that do not progress the
evaluation. The Moderatorâs role is to foster discussion and evaluation.
They should refrain from detailed explanations of the proposal since if
this is required, it means the proposal is not clearly written or
defined.
A poll to judge support for passing the proposal to âRecommendedâ status
may be taken at any time, but will occur no earlier than 3 months after
the proposal achieved âProposedâ status. All IODE and JCOMM member /
member states will be polled with one vote per member. If the proposal
attains 75% support of respondents, The Moderator will recommend to the
chair of ETDMP that the proposal pass to the âRecommendedâ step.
If the proposal does not achieve sufficient support, the moderator will
summarize the discussions of the forum, and provide a list of
shortcomings identified. This will be provided to ETDMP.
ETDMP may decide:
- that the proposal should be returned to the proponent, along with
the comments and an invitation to resubmit a modified proposal.
- to cease further consideration of the proposal in which case the proponent will be provided with the comments and decision.
- to suspend the proposal. Reasons for doing so may include that
there has been insufficient testing performed, or that the proposal
though sound, needs better clarity. The moderator will work with the
proponent to improve the description, or identify means to conduct
further tests. In no more than 3 months, the revised proposal, with
perhaps new results from testing will again be put to a vote. If
sufficient support is achieved, the proposal is recommended to the chair
of ETDMP to pass to the âRecommendedâ stage, or is removed from the
process.
At the end of this step, the IODE-PO will close the public forum and archive the discussions.
The comments will be placed on the appropriate pages of the standards
process web site maintained by the IODE-PO and associated with the
proposal. The outcome of the review will be clearly indicated.
Step 5: Recommended
Having achieved âRecommendedâ status, the standard will be widely advertised.
The IODE-PO will undertake the following actions:
- It will use methods such as Circular Letters, emails, notices on
web pages and other communications means to notify member/member states
of IOC and JCOMM that the standard has been recommended.
- It will provide the URL where information about the standard can be found
- It will invite all member/member states of IOC and JCOMM to implement the recommended standard as soon as feasible.
- It will establish a registry where member/member states can
indicate when and in what circumstances they have achieved compliance
with the recommended standard.
The chair of IODE and the chair of the DMPA will prepare appropriate
resolutions on the use of the recommended standard to be submitted to
parent bodies for ratification.