Only networks get to request fields.
Yes - but the Steering Group will probably act as the first Library Operator - and seed the Lib with lots of fields which can then be re-used.
Any field desired by a network is reviewed by a steering group...
Yes - unless it's already in the Field Library
Who acts as the gatekeeper for which networks are allowed to join/use murmurations, and therefore define fields?
The idea is that anyone can be a Schema Creator (SC), by creating a schema and submitting it to Murmurations, then the Steering Group (SG) check that nothing it contains is offensive and that the fields all make sense / are appropriately specified etc - if any fields look dubious I guess the schema needs to go through a review / update process until the SC and the SG are ok with it. If any proposed fields are duplication of existing fields the SG would swap them out for the existing fields, unless the SC presents a compelling reason for a new field.
Here it seems to me that political sense and awareness will be vital to head off any attempt at subversion.
I'm hoping that the "steering" wont be too political / onerous / controversial! And that there wont be too many attempts at subversion - what do you envisage in terms of subversion?
Also, the steering group needs to be absolutely on the ball, so that a suggested field can e.g. be redirected to an existing one.
Yeah - or, as above, just swapped out and replaced, so we avoid the duplication of fields as much as possible
I'd like to see a well-defined process here, that can also be changed if needed, maybe involving ontologists of good reputation.
As "ontologists of good reputation" - You are all cordially invited to suggest a process for the SG, and method of changing the process! 😉
The process for an individual organisation filling in fields looks good now. The main remaining question I have is, how do you check that an organisation actually belongs to a network?
Cool - glad the pics helped - RE checking: I don't think there will be checks on the Profile creation side (other than via Field validation rules) e.g. Anyone can use the 'Test Network' just to check their Profile is working. Likewise, anyone could add their project to e.g. the Community Currency Alliance - simply by filling in all required Fields.
So checks would need to happen on the Aggregation side. I.e. if a Node Operator (NO) added the Co-ops UK Network / Schema to their profile this would require the "Co-ops UK ID number" field to be filled in for the field to validate and the profile to save (so hopefully, if they were not a Member of Co-ops UK they would realise they needed to be and deselect that Network). If they really wanted to appear on the Co-ops UK map and tried to make up a "Co-ops UK ID number" the form would submit - but Co-ops' UK could validate all "Co-ops UK ID number"s against their membership records before publishing Murmurations data to their map - ensuring only Co-ops UK members appear on their map. And, if people try to spoof ID Numbers to get on their map they would know, so would be able to contact them and say "Hey, why not join Co-ops UK and get on our map!?"
If we look at the Solidarity Economy map example - I guess @Colm 's team would need to do similar validation, or at least have some sort of 'approval' process on their end so that anyone can submit info to the Solidarity Economy Map network - but only genuine solidarity Orgs get listed - this could be as simple as someone checking the new entry and ticking an 'approved' box - which then releases the data to the aggregator (the SEA map).
Does that make sense?
