[Moims-dai] Notes from telecon 20160426

Tue May 3 08:39:49 UTC 2016

Dear all,

I have a meeting this afternoon, I could not attend our telecon today.
Apologies,
_______________________________________________________________________
Claire Caillet
CNES
DCT/PS/TVI

Centre Spatial de Toulouse
Tel.: +33 5 61 28 14 38
e-mail : claire.caillet at cnes.fr

18 Avenue Edouard Belin 
31 401 Toulouse Cedex 4
FRANCE
_______________________________________________________________________

-----Message d'origine-----
De : moims-dai-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org [mailto:moims-dai-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org] De la part de Don Sawyer
Envoyé : lundi 2 mai 2016 23:33
À : MOIMS-Data Archive Ingestion
Objet : Re: [Moims-dai] Notes from telecon 20160426

I'm thinking along similar lines.

Don

Sent from my iPhone

> On May 2, 2016, at 4:21 PM, John Garrett <garrett at his.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Does it make sense to use a different term for the Information 
> curation Project?
> Would using something other than project (activity, program, task, 
> exercise, exploitation scheme, etc.) make the distinction clearer?
> 
> Wishing you prosperity and peace,
> -JOhn
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: moims-dai-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org
> [mailto:moims-dai-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org] On Behalf Of D or C 
> Sawyer
> Sent: Monday, May 2, 2016 3:29 PM
> To: MOIMS DAI List <moims-dai at mailman.ccsds.org>
> Cc: Donald & Carolann Sawyer <Sawyer at acm.org>
> Subject: Re: [Moims-dai] Notes from telecon 20160426
> 
> All,
> 
> As one begins to read the document, clearly the Information Creation 
> Project is not the same as the actual project.  It is about the need 
> to create and capture information in association with some other 
> project.  If my project is a proposal to fly an instrument on a 
> spacecraft to address some science question, I'm not going to think 
> about it as an "information Creation Project". I could be convinced 
> that in association with my project, I need to envision an 
> 'Information Creation" parallel activity. However when the stages of 
> the ICP are called out, it appears they are now the same as the actual 
> project.  I find this very confusing. I think the document needs to 
> clearly identify the actual stages of a real project, and then to 
> discuss the information creation aspects of each stage.  I think this is what is intended, but it is not how it currently reads, in my opinion.
> 
> cheers-
> Don
> 
> 
> 
>> On Apr 28, 2016, at 7:05 PM, D or C Sawyer <Sawyer at acm.org> wrote:
>> 
>> All,
>> 
>> I've reviewed the latest draft through section 2 and have inserted a 
>> few
> edits that I think make it more understandable.  See what you think.
> However my main comment, which I've inserted into this version (see 
> below), is about the relationship of an actual project to an ICP.  The 
> inserted comment is as follows:
>> 
>> I belive it is not clear as to the relationahip between the ICP and 
>> the
> actual project. They may be almost the same entity when the objecitve 
> of the project is to generate information, but otherwise I believe the 
> relationship of the ICP stages to the actual project needs to be 
> discussed. In fact, most projects in which new information is the 
> primary objective would most likely refer to their project in terms of 
> the questions they want to answer or some results to be achieved and not in terms of the information to be preserved.
> I believe clarifying this, for the stages, is critical to (wide) 
> adoption and understanding. For example, is the flying of an 
> instrument on a spacecraft the same as the Operation stage?  The 
> spacecraft operation has a lot more going on than just the gathering 
> of information, processing, and analysis.
>> 
>> I'm not sure how I would try to address this. I need to think about 
>> it
> some more, but perhaps others will have some ideas unless you think my 
> concerns is not warranted.
>> 
>> cheers-
>> Don
>> 
>> 
>> <6NNxN-M-0x6-ILF-20160423DMS.docx>
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Apr 26, 2016, at 12:05 PM, David Giaretta <david at giaretta.org> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Notes of CCSDS DAI telecon 20160426
>>> 
>>> Present
>>> .       David Giaretta
>>> .       Mike Kearney
>>> .       Claire Caillet
>>> .       Terry Longstreth
>>> .       John Garrett
>>> .       Bob Downs (for a few minutes at the start of the meeting)
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ACTIONS
>>> ACTION JGG will set up Webex for next week - DONE - JGG has sent out 
>>> an
> email about this
>>> 
>>> ACTION DG to report to Mario about wiki - say we use system used 
>>> before
> rather than CCSDS wiki
>>> 
>>> ACTION DG: Thank Vint Cerf    
>>> 
>>> ACTION: ALL: for next meeting: Review current draft and suggest 
>>> specific
> wording, both in the normative parts and also the non-normative annexes.
>>> 
>>> ACTION: ALL: figure 1-1 - is the update helpful?
>>> 
>>> ACTION: ALL: Think about a diagram which might illustrate a "Vision 
>>> for
> the Future" (see notes from last week) and suggest further areas of work.
>>> 
>>> ACTION : Claire: send pointer to DEDSL software
>>> 
>>> ACTION: JGG and CNES: to provide completion dates for various stages 
>>> of
> DEDSL XML Schema book so far
>>> 
>>> ACTION: DG to ask Mario/Nestor about Green Book
>>> 
>>> ACTION DG send info on DMP workshop - DONE - details and 
>>> registration at
> -https://indico.cern.ch/event/520120/
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Moims-dai mailing list
>>> Moims-dai at mailman.ccsds.org
>>> http://mailman.ccsds.org/mailman/listinfo/moims-dai
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Moims-dai mailing list
> Moims-dai at mailman.ccsds.org
> http://mailman.ccsds.org/mailman/listinfo/moims-dai
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Moims-dai mailing list
> Moims-dai at mailman.ccsds.org
> http://mailman.ccsds.org/mailman/listinfo/moims-dai

_______________________________________________
Moims-dai mailing list
Moims-dai at mailman.ccsds.org
http://mailman.ccsds.org/mailman/listinfo/moims-dai