[Moims-dai] RE: Updated ICP framework document

[david.giaretta at stfc.ac.uk]

Hi all

In case I miss the ICP discussion today:

In general I share John's comments/concerns and I have a couple of extra points:

1) in previous discussions it seemed to help to think about what needed to be "handed over" from one stage to the next. Sometimes these stages will be handled by the same people but often this will not be the case. Thinking about the what needs to be handed over focusses on what each stage needs to add
2) Esther emphasised that there were some similar cycles in several of the stages and between stages - if we try to define processes in too much detail things will get complicated and probably less general. In OAIS we used recursion to get out of that kind of problem
3) there is the use of "stewardship, curation or preservation" - I think we have to use a term (stewardship?) and define it - and then add in a note that in common usage there is confusion/overlap between these terms. If we add to the confusion then we will get into trouble.

Regards

..David

-----Original Message-----
From: John Garrett [mailto:garrett at his.com] 
Sent: 09 February 2015 04:54
To: 'MOIMS-Data Archive Ingestion'
Cc: 'Boucon Daniele'; Giaretta, David (STFC,RAL,RALSP); 'Donald Sawyer'; 'Stéphane Mbaye'; Conway, Esther (STFC,RAL,RALSP); 'Robert R Downs'
Subject: RE: Updated ICP framework document

Hi All,

Following our telecon Friday, Mike provided an extensive set of updates for the entire document.  I felt comfortable making some the changes.  Others were more substantial and I felt that I would like to discuss them with the Working Group before including them.  I think my discomfort is primarily due to the scope, i.e. how much are we going to be able to include in this standard and which pieces will be included in a follow-on standard.  However to ensure Mike's good work isn't lost, I've included his proposals in comment boxes.

Also I understand that some people wanted to share this document with others this week.  So I'm sending several vesions.  I'm sending a marked up version where I made some of Mike's changes.  In addition where Mike suggested major changes, I indicated the changes he would like in attached comments  and my response to his proposal.  Some people arem't able to view Word comment boxes, so I've generated a PDF version that shows the comments and I believe
everyone should be able to see them.   In addition, I've provided a clean
Word version that accepts the changes and doesn't have the comments.

Let me know if I haven't captured something properly.

I look forward to discussing these updates with many of you at the next telecon.

Live, Love, and Work for Peace,
-JOhn