from: Terrance Wang - NOAA Affiliate to: Lauren Jackson - NOAA Affiliate cc: Michele Jacobi - NOAA Federal , George Graettinger - NOAA Federal , Kaitlin DeAeth - NOAA Affiliate , Kirsten Larsen - NOAA Federal date: Aug 4, 2020, 2:37 PM subject: Re: Submission Package Reference ID: L908J6 mailed-by: noaa.gov Hi Lauren, Thanks again for such a thorough review of this dataset. We're learning a lot from this process and will carry on this feedback to future datasets. I've attached an updated data package addressing your points. More details below: I see the note in your ReadMe.txt file that describes the differences between your two .csv data files, but would it be possible for you to be more specific to allow future users of this data to completely understand the files as a lot of the data within the files overlaps? I have updated the Readme.txt file with an explanation of the two .csv files. The "DIVER_Explorer_2020_04_23_feeds.noaa_template_fieldobs_v1_2_1701_605.csv" file is the original field observation template used to fill out the sampled data, while "PHA_2018_Phase3Chinook_FieldObs_datatable.csv" is the polished, processed data table. The metadata files you included reference data that is not in this data package. For example, the extent in the metadata file does not match the coordinates within your .csv data file and your feature type information lists labels that do not have data within your file. There are also keywords such as Gulf of Mexico and Southwest that are unrelated to your data. Also, I noticed a few inconsistencies between your metadata description and your data file. For example, in the metadata the date is stated to be formatted as year, month, day and the date in your data file is formatted as month/day/year. Can you please help clarify the metadata or let me know if there is something that I am missing? Thanks for catching this. There were a few extraneous, general metadata files that get exported out with the data package from DIVER, our data warehouse. I've deleted these metadata files, and included only 3 metadata records that are specifically associated with the main datatable and another 3 records for the raw field observation template. The date formatting inconsistency is fixed now. Your feature catalogue lists all of your variables, but the tags for descriptive information are blank. This kind of information would allow users to understand what they mean. For example, where can I find descriptive information on what the column 'result matrix' refers to. Another option is to include the variable descriptions in the S2N form when you listed them out. Please let me know if I am just overlooking something here. In your DIVER_Explorer_2020_04_23_feeds.noaa_template_fieldobs_v1_2_1701_605.csv file there are many blank columns. Can you either please remove unnecessary blank columns from the spreadsheet or explain them in the documentation. Blank columns can be unclear to a future user of the data, because it is not apparent if data was not collected or if it is missing from the spreadsheet. This also relates to my question above on why the metadata refers to labels that do not contain data. I've removed all blank columns to avoid any future confusion. I've cross checked each feature catalog and its corresponding dataset. Each variable has a description in the metadata and there are no extraneous variables in the metadata. I also have a few recommendations for the information you supplied in the S2N form. The dates need to match the dates the data was collected within the data files. In S2N you supplied the following date range Start Date: 2018-04-22 and End Date: 2018-04-22, however when I assessed your data file I see data points from 4-17-2018 to 4-22-2018. Can you please clarify the correct date range? The correct date range is from 4-17-2018 to 4-22-2018. Thank you for confirming this. The metadata temporal extent reflects this as well. A dataset abstract should describe the data contained within the data package. It is a brief narrative summary of the data set, a clear and concise statement that enables the reader to understand the content of the dataset. This is different from a scientific abstract which usually describes a study. Can you please revise the abstract to describe the data? I see, thanks for the clarification. How does this sound? "This data package contains field observation data associated with the Portland Harbor Superfund Site Phase 3 Juvenile Chinook study, which was conducted from 4-17-2018 to 4-22-2018. The main datatable is the post processed spreadsheet used to conduct subsequent analyses. The related datatable is the raw field observation template spreadsheet which was then processed into the main datable. Datasets exported from the DIVER warehouse may originate from data producers other than NOAA. NOAA does not warrant the completeness or accuracy of provisional datasets, which may be subject to revision based on validation or QA/QC." Likewise, I think the title should be a bit more descriptive if possible. In general, the title should include the primary variables in the data, the location from which the data was collected (which you have, thank you!), and the date range of the data. How about this? "Portland Harbor Superfund Site Phase 3 Juvenile Chinook Study, Field Observation Data, 4-17-2018 to 4-22-2018" Lastly, would you like a Preview Graphic to be associated with this dataset that will be displayed on the geoportal landing page. A preview graphic is a requirement for a DOI. Are there any specifications for the preview graphic (e.g. resolution? file size? dimensions?"). I've attached a .jpg file, let me know if that works. Please let me know if any of the above concerns need to be further addressed. Hope this helps! Best, Terrance GIS Analyst | Genwest Systems Inc. NOAA | Office of Response & Restoration Assessment & Restoration Division | Spatial Data Branch 7600 Sand Point Way NE Seattle, WA 98115 206-526-6404 from: Lauren Jackson - NOAA Affiliate to: Terrance Wang - NOAA Affiliate , Lauren Jackson - NOAA Affiliate date: Jul 30, 2020, 10:39 PM subject: Submission Package Reference ID: L908J6 mailed-by: noaa.gov Hi Terrance, I have a few initial questions about your data submission package titled "Portland Harbor Phase 3 Subyearling Chinook 2018 Field Observations". My goal is to ensure that your data can be understood and used in the future by users from diverse backgrounds. I see the note in your ReadMe.txt file that describes the differences between your two .csv data files, but would it be possible for you to be more specific to allow future users of this data to completely understand the files as a lot of the data within the files overlaps? The metadata files you included reference data that is not in this data package. For example, the extent in the metadata file does not match the coordinates within your .csv data file and your feature type information lists labels that do not have data within your file. There are also keywords such as Gulf of Mexico and Southwest that are unrelated to your data. Also, I noticed a few inconsistencies between your metadata description and your data file. For example, in the metadata the date is stated to be formatted as year, month, day and the date in your data file is formatted as month/day/year. Can you please help clarify the metadata or let me know if there is something that I am missing? Your feature catalogue lists all of your variables, but the tags for descriptive information are blank. This kind of information would allow users to understand what they mean. For example, where can I find descriptive information on what the column 'result matrix' refers to. Another option is to include the variable descriptions in the S2N form when you listed them out. Please let me know if I am just overlooking something here. In your DIVER_Explorer_2020_04_23_feeds.noaa_template_fieldobs_v1_2_1701_605.csv file there are many blank columns. Can you either please remove unnecessary blank columns from the spreadsheet or explain them in the documentation. Blank columns can be unclear to a future user of the data, because it is not apparent if data was not collected or if it is missing from the spreadsheet. This also relates to my question above on why the metadata refers to labels that do not contain data. I also have a few recommendations for the information you supplied in the S2N form. The dates need to match the dates the data was collected within the data files. In S2N you supplied the following date range Start Date: 2018-04-22 and End Date: 2018-04-22, however when I assessed your data file I see data points from 4-17-2018 to 4-22-2018. Can you please clarify the correct date range? A dataset abstract should describe the data contained within the data package. It is a brief narrative summary of the data set, a clear and concise statement that enables the reader to understand the content of the dataset. This is different from a scientific abstract which usually describes a study. Can you please revise the abstract to describe the data? Likewise, I think the title should be a bit more descriptive if possible. In general, the title should include the primary variables in the data, the location from which the data was collected (which you have, thank you!), and the date range of the data. Lastly, would you like a Preview Graphic to be associated with this dataset that will be displayed on the geoportal landing page. A preview graphic is a requirement for a DOI. Please feel free to let me know if you have any questions. I know there is a lot of information here. If you think it will be easier for us to discuss these items in a call, I will be glad to set one up. Best, Lauren -- Lauren A. Jackson Mississippi State University Northern Gulf Institute @ NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information 1021 Balch Boulevard, Suite 1003 228-688-3563 Stennis Space Center, MS 39529 Lauren.Jackson@noaa.gov