The population of PROJECT_NAME is currently unconstrained and seemingly used for 2 different concepts

[matdon17]

“PROJECT_NAME” in Argo files is currently and unconstrained free-text field, defined as:
“Name of the project which operates the profiling float that performed the profile”

It is synonymous with “Program” as used on Ocean OPS. Here it is populated with a mixture of:

• Time-limited ‘projects’ e.g. EU “MERSEA”, French “SOCLIM”
• Ongoing ‘Argo programmes’, e.g. British “Argo UK”, American “Argo UW”

External project databases exist such as EDMERP, but this mostly seems

Q1: Is the distinction between a project/program an issue?
Q2: If it is, should we endeavour to fix it?

If so, should we constrain PROJECT_NAME against one or more vocabularies, of even separate the concepts of program and project?

[randerson57261]

We (WHOI) have been filling this entry with project and operating institution ("GO-BGC, WHOI"). In our case the project (GO-BGC) is not the same as who "operates the profiling float".

Internally, we generate this field from two separate fields in our database: "Project" and "Operating Institution"

Perhaps the fields should be:
"PROJECT_NAME": which represents the project that is funding (e.g. NOAA, GO-BGC)
"PROGRAM" or "OPERATING_INSTITUTION": the program that operates the float.

We have also put our institution name in the PI_NAME field in the past before the PI names, since there is no operator field.

[vturpin]

At OceanOPS, we have thought a bit about the concept of "project" based on our cross networks and programs monitoring expertise and the issue we also face. I. e. noone understand "PROJECT" the same way, so this information become alsmost "unexploited". we came to this conclusion: project, program, networks, array should be seen as tags.

At OceanOPS we call this tags "NETWORKS" that is define as follow :
"A network is a grouping of platforms, crossing the boundaries of the program. It is usually virtual and represents a common effort or way to measure data. It can represent a mutualized scientific/geographical goal (array), a platform class, or logistical/funding/etc. approach. The Network entity is then described by:
• Network type " : (new concept to be populated and defined)

Such organisation allow to avoid the missunderstanding in the concept "project" and tagging different platform type under the same value.

Suggestion would be to use both "NETWORKS" and "NETWORKS_TYPE" instead of "PROJECT". Need to work a bit on the definitions of the concept, authorized values of network_type and rules (no network_type allowed).

[randerson57261]

Our largest concern has been getting our funding agency in one of the fields, typically "PROJECT_NAME". But a "FUNDER" field would be great.

[vturpin]

Using "AGENCY" and "AGENCY'S ROLE" as lists is also an option.
For instance : "NOC, BODC, NERC, NOC" and "OPERATING AGENCY, DATA ASSEMBLY CENTER, FUNDER, FUNDER"

[vturpin]

Following @randerson57261 and @matdon17 suggestions, we (OceanOPS) think that separating the two concepts "PROGRAM" and "PROJECT" is a good idea.
"PROGRAM" will be constrain to the list of Argo Program - https://www.ocean-ops.org/api/1/help/?param=program
"PROJECT" will remain free text.

A good definition of both concept should be given. Some already exist:

• https://www.ocean-ops.org/metadata/
• https://commons.esipfed.org/acdd_1-3_references

As it seems there is a consensus on this topic amongst the participant here, @nvs-vocabs/avtt how shall we move forward ? Shall we work further on those definitions and one a reference list of program to be included in NVS ? Shall we engage in the writing of a proposal for next ADMT in that sense ?

[vturpin]

Would the team be ok if OceanOPS provide a suggestion for the evolution of the format following the discussion above ?
I would be happy to provide this ahead of ADMT-24.

[mscanderbeg]

Yes, @vturpin, that would be great. thanks!

[vturpin]

Here is what we suggest:

(1.) Add an entry for "PROGRAM NAME" in the table of sections 2.2.4 ; 2.3.4 ; 2.4.4 of the (Argo user manual)
(2.) Update the definition of "PROJECT_NAME" in the table of sections 2.2.4 ; 2.3.4 ; 2.4.4 of the (Argo user manual)

(1.)
PROGRAM_NAME | char PROGRAM_NAME(N_PROF, STRING64);
PROGRAM_NAME:long_name = "Name of the program";
PROGRAM_NAME:_FillValue = " "; | The overarching program(s) of which the dataset is a part.
A program consists of a set of related and possibly interdependent projects (PROJECT_NAME) that meet an overarching objective.
A program defines a group of floats managed by the same lead agency. It materializes the implementing, operating, and responsible team.
PROGRAM_NAME are managed by OceanOPS, the list of acceptable PROGRAM_NAME types is in
the reference table: "ref table"
Detailed definition of PROGRAM_NAME is available here.
Example : “Argo India” or "Argo GO-BGC, UW" |

(2.)
PROJECT_NAME | char PROJECT_NAME(N_PROF, STRING64);
PROJECT_NAME:long_name = "Name of the project";
PROJECT_NAME:_FillValue = " "; |
Name of the projects which operates the profiling float that performed the profile.
Multiple projects can be separated by commas.
Example : “GYROSCOPE, GMMC”; |

Any Feedback would be appreciated.
Note that this doesn't solve all the question raised by this issue.

[vpaba]

Hi @vturpin, thanks for presenting this proposal at ADMT. I understand that the next steps are for a new NVS collection for PROGRAM_NAME to be created? Thank you

[vturpin]

Hi Violetta, Yes exactly, I can share with you an API link to access the program and its definition. Would it be ok ? What do you need exactly to create an NVS collection ? Also the program are linked to the institute (EDMO) and PI (new reference list)... shall we consider those links at this early stage of the creation of the collection or can we move on and connect the collections afterward ? But the best should maybe to have a 30min discussion on this particular topic with the approriate person if this is not you. Best, V.

…

________________________________ De : Violetta Paba ***@***.***> Envoyé : vendredi 3 novembre 2023 14:46 À : nvs-vocabs/ArgoVocabs ***@***.***> Cc : Victor Turpin ***@***.***>; Mention ***@***.***> Objet : Re: [nvs-vocabs/ArgoVocabs] The population of PROJECT_NAME is currently unconstrained and seemingly used for 2 different concepts (#5) Hi @vturpin<https://github.com/vturpin>, thanks for presenting this proposal at ADMT. I understand that the next steps are for a new NVS collection for PROGRAM_NAME to be created? Thank you — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<#5 (comment)>, or unsubscribe<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AS7CRM5AKBHSCQV4GJZNNQDYCTYR7AVCNFSM4UAXJSWKU5DIOJSWCZC7NNSXTN2JONZXKZKDN5WW2ZLOOQ5TCNZZGI2DMNRSGMZA>. You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[vturpin]

Here is a further detailed definition of a PROGRAM:

"A program defines a group of platforms (floats in the Argo case) or cruises managed by the same lead agency (generally national). It materializes the implementing, operating, and responsible team. A program is bound to:

• one and only one country,
• to one or several agencies (including one lead agency) with defined roles,
• to a set of contact points with defined roles.

Some particular cases such as EuroArgo (European Research Infrastructure Consortium), or E-SURFMAR (EUMETNET, grouping of European National Meteorological Services) use a multinational agency and “Europe” as country."

[vpaba]

Hi @vturpin , thanks for the additional info and I hope you don't mind, as I have created a new issue to distinguish the PROGRAM discussions from the PROJECT_NAME ones here: #80

[vpaba]

Re: PROJECT_NAME - possible Linked Data solutions to constrain this Argo metadata variable if required were suggested at a recent BODC vocab group discussion:

• EDMERP https://edmerp.seadatanet.org/
• EDIOS: https://edios.seadatanet.org/search?steps=000
• EDMO: https://edmo.seadatanet.org/ (this was mentioned above as well for possible institute link to PROGRAM)

Not sure if all relevant but worth considering in case

[tcarval]

@vturpin , should we present the proposal to ADMT, or does it need to be refined ? (I just added the "admt approval requested" label).

[vturpin]

Considering PROGRAM is about to be constrained to an Argo vocabulary and the latest program list has been transmited to NVS. I think we should, yes.

"PROJECT" doesn't have to be constrained to a vocabulary in my opinion.
"PROJECT" should be seen as a tag to regroup floats together from different programs.

OceanOPS can monitor PROJECT on request. As we do with EuroArgo and EU project they are involved in.

For instance, the PROGRAM named "EuroArgo program" is deploying floats funded by different "PROJECT".
EuroArgo requests us to create "PROJECT" named "EuroArgo RISE" and "EU GEORGE".
At the same time, the PROGRAM "Argo Germany", also involved in the EuroArgo RISE project, can also use PROJECT = "EuroArgo RISE" in the meta file. By doing so, we can easily regroup floats from this particular project together.

[vturpin]

To synthetise,

We keep project PROJECT_NAME unconstrained
And we add "PROGRAM_NAME" constrained to a new argo vocab.

suggested evolution of the user manual:

(1.) Add an entry for "PROGRAM NAME" in the table of sections 2.2.4 ; 2.3.4 ; 2.4.4 of the (Argo user manual)
(2.) Update the definition of "PROJECT_NAME" in the table of sections 2.2.4 ; 2.3.4 ; 2.4.4 of the (Argo user manual)

(1.)
PROGRAM_NAME | char PROGRAM_NAME(N_PROF, STRING64);
PROGRAM_NAME:long_name = "Name of the program";
PROGRAM_NAME:_FillValue = " "; | The overarching program(s) of which the dataset is a part.
A program defines a group of floats managed by the same lead agency. It materializes the implementing, operating, and responsible team of the float.
A program can consists of a set of related and possibly interdependent projects (PROJECT_NAME) that meet an overarching objective.
PROGRAM_NAME are managed by OceanOPS, the list of acceptable PROGRAM_NAME types is in
the reference table: "[ref table to be added here]"

(2.)
PROJECT_NAME | char PROJECT_NAME(N_PROF, STRING64);
PROJECT_NAME:long_name = "Name of the project";
PROJECT_NAME:_FillValue = " "; |
Name of the projects the float is part of. PROJECT_NAME is a tag used to group floats together easily.
Multiple PROJECT_NAME can be separated by commas.
Example : “EA RISE", "HE GEORGE"; |