[Moims-dai] Minutes of 20th ILF telecon
Daniele.Boucon at cnes.fr
Fri Aug 21 18:05:07 UTC 2015
Please find below the minutes of yesterday ILF telecon. Feel free to correct or complete.
1.Friday 21st August (15h EU time, 9h US time-Washington): dedicated to PAIS
2. Thursday 3rd September(15h EU time, 9h US time-Washington): dedicated to ILF
If available, proposal to use Dave's new number for the sound:
+1-844-467-6272 USA Toll Free
20th August meeting minutes
DB: Daniele Boucon
DG: David Giaretta
DS: Don Sawyer
EC: Esther Conway
JG: John Garrett
MA : Mirko Albani
MM: Mike Martin
RD: Robert Downs
SH : Steve Hughes
SM: Stephane Mbaye
SR: Stephane Reecht
BC: Bertrand Caron
PT: Jean-Philippe Tramoni
D=Decision, A=action (other = discussion)
Participants: DB, JG, MM, DG, RD
6. Information Lifecycle Framework (ILF)
=>First: global comments:
1.Activities: material (comments, tables) from the WG shows that according to the point of view, organization and set of activities differ, with intersection points.
WG agrees on the interest to keep activities defined and attached to Lifecycle main phases (typical ones shown in figure, more detailed in text).
WG also agrees on the need to keep link with LTDP ones -> exchange with LTDP to be conducted in parallel.
=> A=>(DB): send MA information on CCSDS lifecycle and activities, compared to LTDP ones.
*one describing the relationships with other community standards such as LTDP.
*one explaining the relationships with the other standards OAIS, PAIMAS/PAIS showing the place of this one.
3. Terminology and title of the standard
Preservation/Curation/Stewardship: these terms have not the same “impact” according to communities or even individual understanding.
Note: the OAIS only defines and uses “Long Term Preservation”.
So if needed, the use of other “generic”’ terms should be done with precision and context.
RD: use specific terms if appropriate (with precise details), instead of general terms.
DG: PV conference “Preservation and adding value” is still accurate. Propose to define an annex –non normative- containing a list of terms with explanation (curation, stewardship …).
DG: In order not to spend too much time in discussion, proposal to gather such terms in a file and exchange on their meaning for discussion and agreement (this will be a future non normative annex).
Up to now, the title that gains agreement among us is: “Information Lifecycle and Long Term usage”.
3.We must stay as close as we can to the terms from CCSDS standards OAIS, PAIMAS/PAIS, …
=>Second: structure of the ILF document
Section 3: the lifecycle framework: the main stages and information to be gathered
Section 3.1 Information Lifecycle stages.
Including Typical activities with associated recommendations.
Move detailed description of phases 3.3.1 till 3.3.4 here (instead of cutting high level view from explanation, as the number of associated pages will be limited)
Section 3.2: Information topics
Section 3.3 Staged curation information -> change “curation”
Non normative annex: mapping the terminology to existing practice. The obvious one is the ESA-LTDP work.
Non normative annex: relationships with the other standards OAIS, PAIMAS/PAIS showing the place of this one (schema with relationships).
=> A=>(JG + DB): update the structure with the agreed one during telecon.
=>Third: Comments on Topics
The list proposed by David is a very good starting point.
Following are the changes decided during the telecon and areas to work on in the next future:
*Order: alphabetical order is a possible presentation.
*Number of topics: try to limit with some grouping. For example: “packaging” and “SIP” could be part of “handover”.
RD: few high level topics -> WG not completely convinced.
MM and DB: “Cost” –of arciving- is a major point -> WG ok to add this topic.
MM and DB: “Schedule /schedule and changes” should also appear, possible as point of a topic. Example: when should the Archive ready for storage? -> WG ok to have such a point or topic.
DG: what is important is What to say in term of Long term, and what has to be captured.
DB: The existing draft list proposed by David contains different levels of topics. And the OAIS model Info is partly present (Rep Info, Provenance, Rights, packaging, while Context does not appear)
DG: right. Context is distributed in other topics.
DB: Rights -> Legal and Contractual Aspects (wider), Intellectual Property should appear.
JG: AIP and access/DIP included in other topics or to be added?
MM: it is Archive’s business.
DG: make sure that the info is collected (and at the appropriate time), allowing the construction of AIPs. AIP is a logical item.
è So not necessary to have AIP and DIP as topics.
DB: talking about AIP, inventory = not only a list of information, but also relationships between the components (network).
MM: discovery ->OAIS Descriptive Info.
=>Need for consolidation
=>A(WG): consolidation of list of topics and associated points.
Analysis and material produced by the WG.
DG: criteria to focus on.
JG+DB: include LTDP activities.
=>A(WG): identification of the activities that are important to be highlighted in the document plus explanation (why important?).
=>A(MM): explain more the activities proposed by Mike.
JG: links between activities and topics -> informative.
=>Fifth: Proposal for a set of phases to produce the ILF standard (high level agreement, no deeper discussed)
September: Consolidate the list of topics and consolidate the typical activities
Till mid-October: High level links between activities and topics
Mid October-end November: Develop the topics
December: Link with CCSDS archiving standards, Mapping with LTDP, Internal review
Please send to JG updates in actions.
Updated actions will be sent separately by JG.
End of 20th August meeting minutes
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the MOIMS-DAI