Confluence Retirement

Due to the feedback from stakeholders and our commitment to not adversely impact USGS science activities that Confluence supports, we are extending the migration deadline to January 2023.

In an effort to consolidate USGS hosted Wikis, myUSGS’ Confluence service is targeted for retirement. The official USGS Wiki and collaboration space is now SharePoint. Please migrate existing spaces and content to the SharePoint platform and remove it from Confluence at your earliest convenience. If you need any additional information or have any concerns about this change, please contact Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.
Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

The Best Practices SubTeam of the Community for Data Integration (CDI)’s Data Management Working Group resumed group review and analysis of John’s compilation of data lifecycle models.




John Faundeen (Lead), Abby Benson, Brian Buczkowski, Elizabeth Martin, Heather Henkel, Jen Carlino, Robin Fegeas, and Scott McEwen.

Data Lifecycle Models (cont’d)

  1. 14.   Scientific Data Management Plan Guidance
  • All text; no graphic.  Like concepts, including “Harnessing”
  • In our narrative, we can cite existing catalogs and repositories; we might want to make sure these catalogs/repositories follow agreed upon best practices and standards, including adequate backup and archiving.

15. Linear Data Life Cycle

  • First impression:  too elementary.  But then, like the planning on the left and flow of “governance and stewardship” going across.
  • Later stages seem questionable
  • Step missing between integrate and publish
  • Linear doesn’t seem like the best approach for our purposes, would rather have a circular model
  • A maintenance stage seems lacking

16. Generic Science

  • Introduces the idea of archive/discard which is interesting
  • Very general model
  • Doesn’t add much to the discussion

17. Cassandra Hybrid Lifecycle Model

  • Good early attempt to synthesize the group’s opinions
  • Seems to rise to the top of the models that should be considered the upper tier
  • Bi-directional and you can start anywhere in the diagram
  • Some discussion about the Consumer Perspective. Could be useful but may need to be outside the model. Would need to think about that piece more.
  • Lots of discussion about the pre-defined roles for scientists vs. IT professionals- could be really useful if handled the right way.

18. Ray Obuch Lifecycle Approach

  • Adapted from a powerpoint presentation so all the images are missing.
  • From a workshop in 1997 which is interesting that it’s from 14 yrs ago.
  • Evaluation after preservation seems out of order. Also Access should be first. The order seems a bit wonky[JLF1|#_msocom_1] .
  • Would be a good candidate for reviewing the wording and adding bits and pieces to the overall model that is put together. The definitions are very helpful and would be useful in the overall model.

19. USGS Data Management Plan Framework, Steve Tessler

  • This one also floats to the top of the pack for the upper tier
  • Makes distinction between research and preservation which was well received. Leads to defining of roles and reinforces the need for specific roles for scientists so they know what is expected of them.
  • Interesting diagram with feedback loops
  • Phases not sequential, there is a lot of overlap between them.
  • Really like the elements provided in Research Data part of the diagram

20. BLM Data Management Handbook

  • Non-linear model
  • A little too basic (sketchy)- would have to fill in the blanks yourself.
  • Evaluate is confusing about what it is referring to.

Next month review the top 4 and hopefully get an artist to put together a rendering that encompasses all of the best elements.

Next meeting July 6th at noon ET.

  • No labels