[Moims-dai] Notes of the meeting and actions

D or C Sawyer Sawyer at acm.org
Thu May 5 18:07:12 UTC 2016 

Yes, I was thinking that PMBOK probably has examples but I’ve not looked.

On May 5, 2016, at 1:57 PM, David Giaretta <david at giaretta.org> wrote:

> Hi Don
> 
> If you are suggesting a few categories of data as examples for each of the
> stages that would be fine by me - we could do that without delaying the
> document. It may be useful to cross-reference to the Annexes or perhaps
> reference or use PMBOK examples.
> 
> ..David 
> 
> -----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: 05 May 2016 18:27
> To: MOIMS DAI List <moims-dai at mailman.ccsds.org>
> Subject: Re: [Moims-dai] Notes of the meeting and actions
> 
> Hi David,
> 
> While I said 'minimum', I was really thinking of the categories I mentioned
> as examples for a generic project.  I'd be satisfied to stop pretty much
> with the examples I gave so I don't see any need for  more.  But again, if
> we don't have any examples for the generic project, then I'm not sure what
> benefit there is to calling out the stages in this document.  I don't see
> any problem with focusing on the Additional Information (rep, provenance,
> etc.) as applicable to such examples and others the project chooses to
> recognizes as important - whatever they may be.  I think this would actually
> improve the focus on Additional Information for each of the stages, and
> certainly not get anywhere close to addressing how to run projects - apart
> from the need to be cognizant of this Additional Information at each of the
> stages.  My view, anyway, at this point.
> 
> cheers-
> Don
> 
> On May 5, 2016, at 10:27 AM, David Giaretta <david at giaretta.org> wrote:
> 
>> Hi Don
>> 
>> I get worried when you say " I believe we could identify some minimum 
>> categories of data to be retained " - that seems to me to open up a 
>> whole extra level of complexity. I would go so far as to say that we 
>> are experts in digital preservation and OAIS so we have the authority 
>> to talk about Additional Information - most of which is derived 
>> directly from OAIS. On the other hand to make general statements about 
>> data to be collected is rather outside my comfort zone. On the other 
>> hand we can give specific examples - which was the purpose of the Annexes.
>> 
>> If we add those minimum categories about data in general then I'm not 
>> sure when the document would be finished, moreover the focus of the 
>> document should be shifted away from the very thing which is normally
> shortchanged.
>> There are plenty of books on running projects.
>> 
>> ..David
>> 
>> -----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: 05 May 2016 14:42
>> To: MOIMS DAI List <moims-dai at mailman.ccsds.org>
>> Subject: Re: [Moims-dai] Notes of the meeting and actions
>> 
>> Hi David,
>> 
>> My comments below.
>> On May 5, 2016, at 4:53 AM, David Giaretta <david at giaretta.org> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Don
>>> 
>>> In section 1.1 you say "at each stage there is a minimum set of data 
>>> that should be captured. There is Additional Information associated 
>>> with this data"
>>> Also in section 1.2 bullet one says "".. into 4 stages and identifies 
>>> the data..."
>>> 
>>> This implies
>>> (1) the Additional Information is only created when data is created - 
>>> but at the Formulation stage the Additional Information is the best 
>>> guess about the data to be created later
>> 
>> As I understood the rest of the document, the Additional Information 
>> included Rep Info, Provenance,  etc. These are categories that are 
>> often left out or shortchanged. Therefore I was taking the view that 
>> 'data' in the Formulation or Proposal stage would include the proposal 
>> that should be retained.  There may well be other data that should be 
>> captured at this stage.  Then one should also include relevant 
>> Rep.,Provenance information, etc., i.e. Additional Information to go 
>> with this 'data'.  I did not get the view that 'Additional 
>> Information' included everything EXCEPT the Primary Data. I have a 
>> problem understanding Primary Data when the project is the 
>> construction of a new airplane, for example. However I think it makes
> sense when the main output of the Operational Stage is the creation of data
> (e.g.
>> typical space instrument), which could be understood as the Primary Data.
>> 
>>> (2) the Formulation stage creates data - which is not true unless you 
>>> mean that the plan is itself data - which could be the case but would 
>>> need to be explained
>> 
>> Yes
>> 
>>> (3) the implication seems to be that the document will define some 
>>> minimum set of data - I don't see how we could do that.
>> 
>> At each of the stages, assuming a generic project, I believe we could 
>> identify some minimum categories of data to be retained.  As I 
>> suggested in my previous comments, besides the proposal there would be 
>> design and testing information associated with the 'Implementation' stage
> and the 'operational'
>> stage would have data associated with monitoring the operation and 
>> possibly data generated by the operation (e.g. instrument output 
>> data).  If not, then what is the benefit of calling out the stages in 
>> the context of promoting better data capture for long term 
>> preservation?  I would think a major objective of the document is to 
>> get the project to think more about what types of data should be 
>> captured at each stage.  Of course more details could appear an annexes
> for specific types of projects.
>> 
>>> 
>>> Without wanting to defend the term too strongly, we introduced 
>>> "Primary Data" in order to have some focus because a project may 
>>> create many different types of data but it seems sensible to identify 
>>> the data which will (as part of the Content Information) become what 
>>> OAIS terms the "target of preservation".
>> 
>> Yes, this is convenient when the project's main focus is an instrument 
>> creating data.  I don't see that it resonates very well with other 
>> types of projects.  I think we're understanding the same things so it 
>> is just a matter of figuring out what we want to call things that will 
>> resonate well with projects and allow us to make our points.
>> 
>> cheers-
>> Don
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> ..David
>>> 
>>> -----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: 04 May 2016 01:12
>>> To: MOIMS DAI List <moims-dai at mailman.ccsds.org>
>>> Subject: Re: [Moims-dai] Notes of the meeting and actions
>>> 
>>> All,
>>> 
>>> I've taken an initial stab at updating section 1 to reflect today's 
>>> discussion.  I've done some re-organizing to better separate
>> 'applicability'
>>> from 'purpose and scope'.  I've found that in most places it was 
>>> appropriate to replace 'ICP' with 'project'.  I also found that I did 
>>> not need to call out the individual stages by name, did not need to 
>>> use the term ICP (Information Creation Process) nor did I need to 
>>> mention Primary Data at the level of section 1.  Of course these 
>>> terms and concepts could be introduced in this section if desired.  I 
>>> also think that an update to the title of the document would be 
>>> appropriate at some point to better draw in the interest of a 
>>> project. (Like mentioning 'project' in the title.)
>>> 
>>> Since project is a well defined concept and we know the difficulties 
>>> in getting projects to adequately document their efforts for long 
>>> term preservation, I believe it is most appropriate to limit the 
>>> scope of this document similarly.  As Mark noted, it would be a major 
>>> achievement if we could make progress in this area.
>>> 
>>> Immediately below is a section 1 draft.
>>> 
>>> cheers-
>>> Don
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Moims-dai mailing list
> Moims-dai at mailman.ccsds.org
> http://mailman.ccsds.org/mailman/listinfo/moims-dai

More information about the MOIMS-DAI mailing list