Skip to content

January 5, 2017

Jump to bottom Edit New page
Christina Harlow edited this page Jan 5, 2017 · 13 revisions

Time/Place

This meeting is a hybrid teleconference and IRC chat. Anyone is welcome to join. Here is the info:

Attendees

  • Bryan Brown 🐔
  • Christina Harlow ✏️
  • Nick Ruest
  • Mark Matienzo
  • Betsy Post
  • Chris Mayo
  • Ben Cail
  • Diego Pino
  • Juliet Hardesty
  • Danny Lamb
  • Esme Cowles
  • Andrew Woods

Agenda

  1. PCDM Call procedure
  • Should we have a rotating chair to make sure meetings happen?
  1. Embargo discussion
  2. PCDM FileSets... what is the state of the conversation?
  3. #pcdm irclogger - http://irclogs.pcdm.org/
  4. Feel free to add additional agenda items

Minutes

  1. PCDM Call procedure
    • Should we have a rotating chair to make sure meetings happen?
      • Proposed: Choose new facilitator for the next meeting at the end of each meeting.
      • Approved by folks on call.
      • Esmé will facilitate the next meeting (February).
  2. Embargo discussion: https://github.com/duraspace/pcdm/issues/70
    1. Options:
      1. PSO ontology?
        1. Allows document to have status in time, start date, end date, can attach other properties as well.
        2. But there are gaps in PSO ontology - such as specifying an ip range that can/cannot view an object.
        3. Diego mentions WebAC + WebACL, Matienzo mentioned breaking out ip authentication into separate thread.
        4. bcail mentioned used case of limiting by ip range but also being able to give people personal access.
        5. [from irc chatter] try to use existing PSO / models + ontologies where possible, create breakout issues for lacunae (like with ip ranges).
      2. Circled back to question of: What attributes of an embargo are there? Can attach directly to primary resource?
      3. IP Ranges break out:
        1. General call consensus this should be a separate thread
        2. Who will bring this up as a new ticket?
          1. Matienzo will create the new ticket.
  3. PCDM FileSets... what is the state of the conversation?
    1. Brought up by Andrew Woods: There were a couple of different in-person and online conversations about filesets, how that gets incorporated into set of ontologies, etc. What is the state of things? Is there a concrete answer? Good to get this out to broader PCDM community if so.
      1. Esmé: resolution of previous discussions was some acceptance of having Filesets be in core ontology, definitely have them in an extension, but not requiring them. They’d have to be optional/sidecar deal. Work going on in Hydra community now are on how Filesets are working in new Hydra stack (https://wiki.duraspace.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=78163689), and is focusing on functionality and discoverability concerns there. There may be some modeling outcomes of that, or maybe not - the HydraWorks extension ontology works reasonably well for this and might be enough.
      2. Outcome: may be some changes to core ontology related to Filesets, but not a big priority for anybody at the moment.
    2. Woods: Ok, the discussions seemed like it brought up bigger questions of interoperability, of requirements, the ability to make sense of this when people encounter these resources.
      1. Nick: one of things in October call, there is not a solid understanding of what a Fileset is, what the rules are, because there is a blurred line between a pcdm:Fileset and an pcdm:Object, and what distinguishes the two from each other. Once we have that answer, we can proceed. Right now, if you look at the PCDM wiki that describes the ontology and the ontology itself, the definitions of Filesets are completely different.
      2. Esmé: the idea of what a Fileset is, what it should be used for, whether it is an pcdm:Object or not, there was never solid consensus on that even in the Hydra group implementing it in the Hydra stack. Our documentation is all scattered, incoherent. Tried to reconcile those things and add to the core ontology, get folks to buy into it at the same time, but this didn't work out. For Hydra folks, first figuring out what the Hydra stack needs, making sure the modeling is consistent as it is now, then with that firmer understanding bringing up this conversation again with PCDM would be a more productive route.
      3. Andrew: So issues 59 and 57 can be closed? General group consensus says yes. Esmé closed them.
  4. #pcdm irclogger - http://irclogs.pcdm.org/
    1. Nick: just a FYI: Running irc logger on the pcdm channel. It’s there for you to use. If you notice things not be captured, ping Nick. If you don’t want this up, tell Nick.
    2. Andrew: Seeing here in irc pcdm channel, there’s no subject for the channel, but best practice is to have a subject that mentions the fact that this channel is logged.
    3. Nick: was trying to do that, thought he created the PCDM channel but couldn’t get ops on it to set the message… if somebody could try to get ops on the pcdm irc channel and set the notice or message, please do.

Other notes:

Next Meeting

  • Date: Thursday, Feb. 2 2017
  • Chair: Esme Cowles
Add a custom footer

Communication

Wiki Pages

Community Guidelines

Work Areas & Groups

Shared Resources

Clone this wiki locally