[Moims-dai] Notes from Webex on 12 June 2018

[Eld Zierau]

Just to give an update on action 2:
We had a meeting Friday, and are close to agreement - we are just missing to make the draft of the agreed text, which we expect to finish on Friday, - i.e. we expect to send this to you Friday and be able to discuss it with you on Tuesday 26th of June.
Best Regards, Eld

From: MOIMS-DAI [mailto:moims-dai-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org] On Behalf Of David Giaretta
Sent: Sunday, June 17, 2018 10:02 AM
To: MOIMS-DAI List <moims-dai at mailman.ccsds.org>
Subject: [Moims-dai] Notes from Webex on 12 June 2018

Actions from previous webex
1)      David to write an example of the application of OAIS preservation concepts to components of PDI including illustration of Ingest and recursion. DONE
2)      Matthias and Eld to coordinate on text for section 6.1.5(.*). Matthias to initiate as soon as he is able. IN PROGRESS - see below
Matthias want to help to write text but probably not in 6.1.5 - maybe in sections before this.
DG - maybe Archival Storage always needs some kind of Preservation Planning but not clear that Access needs that.
3)      David to put Eld's PowerPoints of the OAIS diagrams on the review site. DONE

Discussion for OAIS update:
1)      SC88 - added comment to ask for clarification
2)      SC135 - Eld and Matthias/Felix need to co-operate to draft text
3)      Discussion about modelling - see emails from Don, John and I to the list - I guess these are mostly come from http://review.oais.info/show_bug.cgi?id=222

During a discussion between Mark, John and David after the main Webex some clarification of Mark's (and perhaps Don's) concerns about modelling became clearer. There is clearly an important distinction that needs to be made between the "primary" objects which are to be preserved (the "original targets of preservation") e.g. images, scientific data etc., and the "secondary" objects which David was concerned about such as Provenance.  For example, "secondary" objects are largely created by the repository and may be discarded if no longer needed e.g. specific RepInfo about formats may not be needed if all objects in those formats have been transformed to other formats. Hence Mark's (and Don's) insistence on reserving the term "Content Information" for the "primary" objects. It was not proposed to use the terms "primary" and "secondary" in OAIS, we merely used the words for clarity in the discussion.

It was agreed during this discussion that both Mark's and David's concerns can be met by simply adding a sentence:
"The procedures used for preserving RepInfo and PDI should be similar to preserving the original targets of preservation."

My personal additional thought after this discussion: it may still be useful to have an annex discussing this in more detail, being careful in the use of the term "Content Information". Presumably Data Management should also have the functionality to distinguish the "original targets of preservation" from the "secondary" objects.

I think I have summarized the discussions accurately, but all corrections are welcome.

..David



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/moims-dai/attachments/20180618/a252435b/attachment.html>