[Moims-dai] Notes from DAI Webex meeting 14th Feb 2017

Wed Feb 15 22:01:42 UTC 2017

All,

Bruce, thanks for you comments.  On a related note, it occurs to me that some people think that OAIS should have all the terms and concepts they use to describe their implementation.  What they should be doing is describing how their implementation addresses OAIS terms and concepts.  I think it would be useful to clarify this within the document.

Cheers-
Don

On Feb 15, 2017, at 11:17 AM, bambacher at verizon.net wrote:

> Don,
> Thank you for that succinct and logical statement   As one of the principal authors of OAIS your views carry a lot of import for me.  Their approach may be the "flavor of the month," but their approach goes beyond the conceptual to a specific implementation.  As you note OAIS is a conceptual model not implementation specifications.  I hope there will be support for returning informative annexes.  This could be one as an approach to what OAIS calls federated archives.
>  
>  
> On 02/15/17, D or C Sawyer<Sawyer at acm.org> wrote:
>  
> All,
> 
> I have a few initial thoughts on SC#135.  It is clearly a special case.  The vast majority of current archives are not distributed in the sense of relying on cooperating, independently funded, organizations to ensure long term preservation of some particular information.  However one can consider farming out some archival services, such as storage to the ‘cloud’ (Dropbox?), and then ask the question ‘do we still have an OAIS archive’?  OAIS is a conceptual model intended to provide terms and concepts to describe what is needed and to talk about implementations.  It still works in such a situation but it prompts the question as to whether such implementations are sufficiently reliable, given the independent funding.  I think the short answer is ‘it depends’.  As far as the concept of an OAIS within an OAIS goes, I don’t think it makes any sense.  If the inside implementation is a full OAIS, then what is the outside OAIS adding?  If it has additional information, then what one has is really two coordinating or cooperating OAISs.
> 
> I would be totally opposed to making OAIS any more complex than it is.  However these issues of distribution and the reliability of independently funded services are important.  I could see an informational annex, as John has suggested, provided there is time to get a consensus on what it should say.  I would suggest it be short, again lay out the purpose of OAIS, note its applicability to distributed implementations (already in OAIS), and then specifically note the issue of relying on independently funded organizations for some critical archival internal functions or services.  As David has noted, this seems particularly relevant to ISO 16363.  It might be appropriate to note, in such an Annex, that users of such an archive should be made aware that the archive is relying on the services of an independently funded organization  or implementation for part of the preservation function.  
> 
> My initial thoughts.
> 
> Cheers-
> Don
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Feb 15, 2017, at 7:16 AM, David Giaretta <david at giaretta.org> wrote:
> 
>> Notes from DAI Webex meeting 2017-Feb-14
>> Status of Report to CMC on status of DAI WG Future - version sent washttps://www.dropbox.com/s/qwkehdgcq0ur5sk/MOIMS-DAI%20WG%20Report%20to%20the%20CMC.pdf?dl=0<image003.png> – Word version ishttps://www.dropbox.com/s/lztl9n18sbyvnrt/MOIMS-DAI%20WG%20Report%20to%20the%20CMC%20MOIMS-MM-BB-comments-DAI-responses-v4.docx?dl=0<image003.png>
>> Webex held with Mario on Monday 13th Feb
>> DG will send around notes on the meeting. Bullet points of improvements which we have identified based on the Webex
>> Note Mario mentioned SM&C "archive" - need to make it clear what the difference between that service and what we are doing.
>> Note that CMC will have to approve each book/project
>> Plans may change as we "socialise" the plans
>> IPELTU see latest doc at https://www.dropbox.com/s/pcb9fwkk6uaxr69/6NNxN-M-0x6-ILF-latest-version.docx?dl=0<image003.png> - You will notice there are quite a few changes
>> Used the definition of PHASE from PMBOK and clarify the text
>> Updated section 5 to make the matrix more readable and consistent with the PMBOK approach - still need work for consistency
>> Removed the details of LTDP and add to the block diagram of phases (the diagram has been corrected from last week – one of blocks had the wrong color
>> OAIS Update (and ISO 16363 Update) (http://review.oais.info/<image003.png>)  Work on Suggested Changes
>> Some preliminary discussion about SC#135
>> John Garrett suggests we discuss it together.
>> Terry Longstreth: OO-IO is adding complexity. Making an architectural rule for implementation. Current OAIS does not impede distributed implementations.
>> Matthias Hemmje: shares concerns about increasing complexity of the standard if we add too much more about distribution. OAIS already deals with distribution. Mentioned at iPres and other meetings as a need. This is a valid area of work but it may need more work before it could be incorporated into the OAIS. The OAIS does not specify a distribution architecture nor does it prohibit it. Check all references to distributed in the current standard and make sure they do not impede distributed services. Sections 6.1.1 through 6.1.4.  Add another example/instance - Distributed OAIS  functional entities are distributed but form one OAIS. What Zierau, McGovern et al suggest is one special case of a Distributed OAIS.
>> John Garrett: Important to address distribution in this edition of the OAIS. Make some changes in the main text and include an informational annex. Helen will be talking to Nancy - let us see what happens and maybe hold Skype call.
>> David Giaretta: May be related to 121. Need to think about implications for ISO 16363
>> SC#97 - agreed by DAI - waiting response from Stéphane Reecht
>> SC#212 - deferred until discussion on Roadmap
>> SC#121 - new inputs received from Giovanni
>> SC#30 - Terry is writing text and this is related to SC#75:
>> SC#75 - needs text to be written
>> SC#102: Bob likes "change "may be applicable here" to "may be used to help define the data submission formats and procedures". JGG suggests adding some parenthetical text. Check with Mark:
>> SC#109 - TL says lien is a stronger term. Could say "liens i.e. lists of required corrections or other issues that must be resolved" an leave diagram as it is.  JGG will add resolution to review site
>> SC#130 - TL says we should broaden the examples - perhaps include voice command or computer-to-computer interfaces. DG and TL to provide text
>> SC#132: JGG in favour of keeping examples. Maybe we should be more explicit that this is an example. Text like:  “….accepted or rejected. It could for example include the functionality to provide an estimate of the cost of the request and an option to cancel the request. “. JGG will put this on review site
>> Mark Conrad, in follow-up to today's meeting, provided links to stories about what can go wrong when digital preservation is not planned from the beginning.
>> 
>> Barbara Sierman's site: http://www.atlasofdigitaldamages.info/v1/stories/
>> The links below are to articles about the delays to the rollout of the Airbus A380 because of incompatible data issues and how it cost the company billions of dollars:
>> Catalogue of Catastrophe Airbus A380: http://calleam.com/WTPF/?p=4700
>> BBC – Q&A: A380 delays: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/5405524.stm
>> The Airbus saga: Crossed wires and a multibillion-euro delay: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/11/business/worldbusiness/11iht-airbus.3860198.html
>> What Grounded the Airbus A380?: Company management and CAD software both under fire in an interoperability debacle of jumbo proportions: http://www.cadalyst.com/cad/product-design/what-grounded-airbus-a380-10903
>> Airbus: First, Blame the Software: Use of incompatible programs takes the rap, but behind that is a management team cobbled together from formerly separate companies: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2006-10-04/airbus-first-blame-the-software
>> A380 Program Update – Global Investor Forum – Oct 2006 (see slide 13 onwards):http://web.archive.org/web/20061231133122/http://www.eads.com/xml/content/OF00000000400004/0/74/41485740.pdf
>> EADS execs pledge to restore confidence in Airbus, fix A380 problems:http://old.seattletimes.com/html/businesstechnology/2003131857_webeads16.html
>> _______________________________________________
>> MOIMS-DAI mailing list
>> MOIMS-DAI at mailman.ccsds.org
>> https://mailman.ccsds.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/moims-dai
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> MOIMS-DAI mailing list
> MOIMS-DAI at mailman.ccsds.org
> https://mailman.ccsds.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/moims-dai
> _______________________________________________
> MOIMS-DAI mailing list
> MOIMS-DAI at mailman.ccsds.org
> https://mailman.ccsds.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/moims-dai

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/moims-dai/attachments/20170215/7bddf3aa/attachment.html>