- Update on each work package (WP leaders, 20 min) (WP1, WP2, WP3, WP5)
- Organization of Oslo and Lisbon meetings (NO and PT, 20 min)
- Administrative aspects (and in particular: do we ask for an extension?) (FR, 10 min)
- Focus on communication and dissemination (PT, 15 min) (Slides)
- Focus on VTL projects and perspectives (all, 15 min)
- Other business: security audits, CSPA... (FR & SE, 10 min)
Accomplished: the Relais service has been delivered (architecture document, code on the repository, tests on Travis, quality report); the guidelines on best practices have been delivered.
In progress: ARC and Relais integration. A virtual mini-hackathon will be organized in June.
Insee makes the following remarks:
- Each service publisher should plan the release of a "meaningful" (i.e. coherent in terms of functionalities) version of their service before the end of the project.
- More work is needed on the re-uses cases. Without them, the ESSnet's objectives will not be met.
Statistics Sweden has over-consumed on WP2 (72 days for 60 budgeted). Transfers from other countries or other part of the budget could be considered.
D2.1, Architecture recommendations: SCB is still working on it (focusing on the "Why, WHo, What and How").
D2.2, Cookbook: it is necessary to develop the theoretical elements in concrete experiments. This is foreseen for the next Hackathon (examples on Git).
D3.2: work on examples has also started.
Blueprint: a meeting with WP2 was held in May; the blueprint is being finalized.
The delivery slips have been delivered for the three services.
The document on lessons learnt is not begun.
Statistics Sweden budget needs to be increased. We could transfer budget from subcontracting to staff cost.
The 2020 Quality conference has been cancelled. The communication on I3S planned for this event is no longer possible.
Currently, the Oslo Hackathon is planned during the week of the 31st of August, but it is not known if it will be possible to travel to Norway at that time (several countries indicate that it is not probable). Should we try a virtual meeting? It is difficult to make a hackathon during a virtual meeting, so the choice is between a shortened virtual hackathon and delaying the meeting. The latter is the preferred option, and it is underlined that an extension of the ESSnet would be a good thing for allowing this.
Experts from Finland could be invited for the hackathon (Finland is leading the GeoStat 4 ESSnet). SSB will contact Statistics Finland.
Regarding the agenda proposed by Statistics Norway, it is suggested to merge the architecture and development tracks, and put the focus on the examples. The resulting group will be too big: a solution would be to make subgroups on particular examples.
The duration of the workshop can be 2 or 3 days. 3 days is long for such an event, and the organisation is a lot of work. On the other hand, the workshop could be the CSPA meeting of the year, so enough time should be given to accomodate a rich agenda. A duration of 2.5 days, with help from the Unece for the organisation, seems like a good compromise. An extension of the project timespan would allow to move the workshop to March or April 2021, and thus provide more time to organize.
The main question is extending the project timespan. All consortium members agree that an extension would be useful. Several arguments have already been mentioned:
- The working method used by the ESSnet is based on hackathons, which require physical meetings in order to be really productive.
- Pandemic led to many event being cancelled (eg. Q2020) or reduced (eg. DIME-ITDG), so more time is needed in order to communicate on the project's results.
- More time is needed in order to organize the Lisbon workshop, especially if we aim at a large attendance.
How much can we extend the ESSnet? 2, 3, 6 months? Two or three months is too short if we want to be allowed to travel to other countries, but if we ask for more time we need to add substantial things to do during the extension. After discussion, it is decided to ask for an extension between 4 and 6 months.
Insee will contact Pierre to discuss the subject.
Before the Covid crisis, it was planned to ask during the next DIME-ITDG for reopening the survey on share and reuse. It is no longer possible, the agenda of the next DIME-ITDG has been shortened and there is no more room for presentation about ESSnets. A solution to this problem is to make the survey during the Lisbon worskhop with the workshop participants.
We have already four flyers (on JDemetra+, Relais, PXWeb and ARC), that are all almost finished. We have also a template for writing flyers on success stories. But ve have only one interview (Jean Palate). We need to make more written or video interviews in order to promote our approach. Whe should also have reuse cases (in the scope of WP1), those reuse cases would make good success stories. More generally, we need more success stories. Benoît will follow up with INE on this question.
Nothing new has been done on the Sinder. It doesn't seem possible to go beyond functional requirements during the ESSnet. A further step would be to actually develop an app, which could constitute a developing track during the future hackathon. A prerequisite would be to have a programmatic access to the CSPA catalogue. INE will be asked to investigate this matter.
It was decided to include VTL tools as a deliverable for WP1.
At Insee, the internal use of VTL will be expanded, and Insee is developing a JavaScript editor tool and engine. Eurostat is also developing VTL tools (editor, rules repository...) in the framework of its activities on data validating. A meeting with Eurostat, Insee and Statistics Norway took place a few days ago (it was the second meeting, the first took place a few months ago). It was in particular decided to achieve interoperability between Insee's and Eurostat's developments. For that, a technical meeting will be organized shortly.
Insee has also use cases that call for a Java implementation. For that, Insee will adapt to VTL 2.1 what has been done by SSB on VTL 1.1.
Statistics Sweden has developed a .Net VTL engine and an editor.
20k€ is available in Insee's budget for security audits of the delivered services. Insee wants to perform the audit for ARC. Istat thinks it is also a good opportunity for Relais. PXweb underwent an audit 2 years ago, but it is probably a good idea to make a new one.
Istat indicates that it will consume its subcontracting budget.
The question is what to take in the I3S project to integrate in CSPA. The services should be added to the catalogue, and the Architecture recommendations feed the work on CSPA (idem for the Cookbook). The artifacts catalogue will also be completed with WP4 results. Jakob will follow up on these matters.
It is proposed to have a specific session during the next hackathon on how to reuse the content of I3S in the CSPA initiative; for this we need somebody from the Unece.