[Moims-dai] Notes on meeting with Vint Cerf
kearneysolutions at gmail.com
Fri Apr 22 13:49:47 UTC 2016
* I don’t think that the intention was to say that ALL repositories want to be interoperable.
Absolutely right. If a repository is not interoperable, it should be because that repository chooses to be non-interoperable. Not because there is no choice to be interoperable because of industry divergence and broad incompatibilities.
In my opinion the business case for interoperability can be entirely made by the cross-discipline research scenario where future researchers need to access multiple discipline databases, multiple mission databases, etc. in order to get synergized results to make new discoveries. But of course there are also other business cases for the standardization that leads to interoperability, such as commercial products, cost reduction, “many eyes on the problem”, etc. All of the benefits of standardization, the greatest of which is interoperability.
Totally understand that there are many diverse and obscure databases and archives that will never be able to line up with an interoperability standard. But if we fail to produce the standard, then we (the standards community) have produced the problem, not them.
* 4. We need to assert our original goal of developing a standard and an audit process to evaluate digital repositories against that standard as to their ability to operate a digital repository that can accept digital data, preserve it, and provide it in a usable form to a user when requested. If we cannot find or develop that market, we certainly cannot develop Vint Cerf's under developed concepts.
Absolutely. That doesn’t contradict the need to set interoperable standards as the next goal, does it? To better develop those under-developed concepts?
Huntsville, Alabama, USA
From: moims-dai-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org [mailto:moims-dai-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org] On Behalf Of David Giaretta
Sent: Friday, April 22, 2016 6:36 AM
To: 'MOIMS-Data Archive Ingestion' <moims-dai at mailman.ccsds.org>
Subject: RE: [Moims-dai] Notes on meeting with Vint Cerf
I don’t think that the intention was to say that ALL repositories want to be interoperable.
The way I interpreted it was that in order to increase use of the standards and also to add value to what is being preserved by increasing its usefulness – interoperability is one important way of doing that. I think we should take that on board and try to show how DAI/RAC standards can be used both for preservation and also for adding value.
From: moims-dai-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org <mailto:moims-dai-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org> [mailto:moims-dai-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org] On Behalf Of bambacher at verizon.net <mailto:bambacher at verizon.net>
Sent: 20 April 2016 20:38
To: moims-dai at mailman.ccsds.org <mailto:moims-dai at mailman.ccsds.org>
Subject: Re: [Moims-dai] Notes on meeting with Vint Cerf
If I may make an observation:
1. All of this presumes all digital repositories want to be interoperable, which they may not.
2. Vint Cerf appears to seriously minimize the number of spplications and software used to create digital records requiring preservation. NARA's scope of the problem study found 15,000+ applications and software routines in use in the federal government. It is hard enough to crosswalk between geospatial applications let alone cross walking between geospatial applications and office applications and CAD-CAM applications. I could be over reaching his intentions but even if he only called for inter-operability within a specific discipline, designated community, or data type that is a large problem.
3. Recall the approach of a few test audit sites that ingested data only in a single pre-approved SPSS format, essentially frozen in 30+ years old structure. They dictated to their Designated Community. They would not fit Mr. Cerf's generic protocol for sharing data.
4. We need to assert our original goal of developing a standard and an audit process to evaluate digital repositories against that standard as to their ability to operate a digital repository that can accept digital data, preserve it, and provide it in a usable form to a user when requested. If we cannot find or develop that market, we certainly cannot develop Vint Cerf's under developed concepts.
5. We should obviously respond, thank him, state our position and how it fits his challenge. But, unless he can provide funding and/or FTE to pursue the issue, it is beyond our scope of effort.
On 04/20/16, David Giaretta<david at giaretta.org <mailto:david at giaretta.org> > wrote:
Moims-dai mailing list
Moims-dai at mailman.ccsds.org <mailto:Moims-dai at mailman.ccsds.org>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the MOIMS-DAI