Notes from Megameeting 13th October 2008

Attendees:

BruceAmbacher UM
CandidaFenton HATII, U Glasgow
HelenTibbo UNC
KatiaThomaz INPE, Brazil
MarieWaltz Center for Research Libraries
RobertDowns CIESIN, Columbia University

Progress made: The additions to the glossary proposed by MarkConrad were discussed and agreed, with two changes: the replacement of "authorized by" by "approved by", and a new definition of Provider/Submitter - see transcript below for details.

Marie Waltz >> (All): Do we want to discuss Mark's additions to the glossary
that he send out on the 29th?
Helen Tibbo >> (All): sounds good
Marie Waltz >> (All): Here they are: Preservation Policy: Written statement authorized
by the repository management that describes the approach to be taken 
by the repository for the preservation of objects accessioned into the 
repository. The Preservation Policy is consistent with the Preservation 
Strategic Plan.Preservation Implementation Plan: A written statement authorized 
by the management of the repository that describes the actions to be taken by 
the repository for preserving a specified set of objects ingested into the 
repository in accordance with the Preservation Policy. Preservation Strategic 
Plan: A written statement authorized by the management of the repository that 
states the goals and objectives for achieving the mission of the repository in 
terms of preserving the objects it holds. Preservation Strategic Plans may 
include long-term and short-term plans. Procedure: A written statement that 
specifies actions required to complete a service or to achieve a specific state 
or condition. Procedures specify how various aspects of the relevant 
Implementation Plans are to be fulfilled. Practice: Actions conducted to execute 
procedures. Practices are measured by logs or other evidence that record actions 
completed. Producer: The role played by those persons, or client systems, who 
provide the information to be preserved. This can include other OAISs or 
internal OAIS persons or systems. (From OAIS Reference Model) Provider (or 
Submitter): A person or system that submits a digital object to the repository. 
The Provider can be the Producer or an agent or representative completing the 
submission on behalf of the producer.
RobertDowns >> (All): The proposed change to the definition of the Preservation 
Policy appears to reflect the discussion from a couple of weeks ago.
BruceAmbacher >> (All): Is anyone else uncomfortable with "authorized by" in 
each term?  I would prefer "approved by" since that conveys review by 
management.
Marie Waltz >> (All): I'm fine with either but I'm sure in some contexts those 
words have more specific meanings then I know.
candida fenton >> (All): Approve does sound more considered
Helen Tibbo >> (All): Yes, I like approved. I would say authorized and approved 
but the standard is requiring the policies so that's taken care of in a way. We 
do want to make sure the management knows of them and approves them
Katia Thomaz >> (All): ok with me.
RobertDowns >> (All): Either way is fine with me.
BruceAmbacher >> (All): Does anyone have any other concerns about the glossary 
terms?
Katia Thomaz >> (All): remembering we also need to discuss relations between 
producer-provider-depositor-submitter.
Helen Tibbo >> (All): The "Producer" is listed as a "role" while the "provider" 
is listed as a "person or system." Is this the way we want it?
Marie Waltz >> (All): Especially since a provider can be: the Producer or an 
agent or representative completing the submission on behalf of the producer.
BruceAmbacher >> (All): Both should have all "attributes"  They may be the same 
person/role or they may be separate persons/roles.
Helen Tibbo >> (All): My question is the use of the terms "role" vs "person."
Katia Thomaz >> (All): According OAIS RM, we have only one entity who provide 
the information to be preserved: Producer
Katia Thomaz >> (All): Are we trying to create another entities?
BruceAmbacher >> (All): Well OAIS RM contradicts itself in that the next 
glossary term is provider (submitter)
Katia Thomaz >> (All): where have you seen this?
BruceAmbacher >> (All): Common practice is to recognize that the 
producer/creator and the provider/submitter can be the same entity or can be 
different entities.
BruceAmbacher >> (All): Katia, I was looking at the Glossary on the 
wiki:http://wiki.digitalrepositoryauditandcertification.org/bin/view/Main/GlossaryOfTerms
Katia Thomaz >> (All): but this is not OAIS RM Glossary...
BruceAmbacher >> (All): Katia, these terms are proposed additions to enhance our 
product in relation to the OAIS RM.  I have not seen anyone object to their 
addition to our glossary.
Katia Thomaz >> (All): ok but this way we create another entities in OAIS RM, 
donīt we?
BruceAmbacher >> (All): Are "creating" or "clarifying" the way digital objects 
arrive at the archives as SIPs?
Katia Thomaz >> (All): i am very confused if we are following OAIS RM or not...
Katia Thomaz >> (All): no problem if we divide producer in any kinds but i donīt 
know about creating another entities...
BruceAmbacher >> (All): The TRAC document we are revising did not set out to 
rigidly adhere to the RM; to complement yes, to blindly adhere, no.  We have 
seen, and will see, others places where TRAC is not totally consistent.
Marie Waltz >> (All): I don't know about OAIS RM and how much we are sticking to 
it either, but in the real world of auditing and certification we need to 
establish who is responsible for each action. At times the repository is 
receiving infromation from third parties who are receiving the data from other 
publishers. In order to establish the chain of responsibilities we need to 
distinguish between these two roles (and I do think they are roles)
RobertDowns >> (All): I agree that distinguishing between them is necessary for 
maintaining the chain of custody.
BruceAmbacher >> (All): I do not know of a preservation program that gets 100% 
of its SIPs from the Producer/creator.  Some SIPs result from "re-ingest" of the 
content after migration or other action taken by archives.
Katia Thomaz >> (All): but producer is only an entity and we can distinguish any 
kinds...
BruceAmbacher >> (All): As Robert indicates, the important issue is to know and 
to inform users of the chain of custody and of all processing and preservation 
actions taken on the SIPs.
Marie Waltz >> (All): I think it just makes it clearer in some of the auditing 
metrics to give them seperate names, but in the bigger picture of OAIS RM we can 
call them all producers. Its just for this document it is more useful to make 
the distinction.
BruceAmbacher >> (All): Katia, Providers may or may not also be the producers. 
We need to distinguish between these persons/roles/entities.  
Katia Thomaz >> (All): producer is only a noun chosen by OAIS team. we should 
focus on the meaning...
BruceAmbacher >> (All): From a provenance and a chain of custody perspective it 
is important to know whether the SIP came from the producer, another 
person/entity actins as a provider, from a web harvest conducted by the 
archives,  All of this helps the user to assess the reliability and accuracy of 
the data.
BruceAmbacher >> (All): Unfortunately, I have an appointment in two minutes.  I 
will join you next week.
Katia Thomaz >> (All): i agree with you, but i am  trying not to create new 
entity
BruceAmbacher >> (All): The other entity exists whether we formally recognize it 
or not.
Katia Thomaz >> (All): ok, iīll stop now.
Katia Thomaz >> (All): in fact, i feel more comfortable following OAIS RM 
because we have many relation inside it.
Marie Waltz >> (All): Katia, can you explain that a little more, I'm not sure 
what you mean.
Helen >> (All): Lost my connection for a bit. All I was pointing out was that if 
all these were roles, then "provider" should start with "The role played by a 
person or system..."
Katia Thomaz >> (All): sorry, marie, i donīt know how to explain more. i present 
all my arguments...
Helen >> (All): This would make it consistent with "producer" and all these 
terms would be roles.
Katia Thomaz >> (All): yes
RobertDowns >> (All): I agree with Helen's suggestion to include the term "role" 
in the definition for Provider 
Marie Waltz >> (All): I agree with that too
Marie Waltz >> (All): So the new version will read: Provider (or Submitter): A 
role played by a person or system that submits a digital object to the 
repository. The Provider can be the Producer or an agent or representative 
completing the submission on behalf of the producer.
RobertDowns >> (All): The suggested revision to the definition for Provider 
looks good to me.
Katia Thomaz >> (All): for me too
Helen >> (All): Any other revisions?
Marie Waltz >> (All): Just the authorization to approval one we all agreed to 
earlier
Helen >> (All): So are we now set with this list?
Marie Waltz >> (All): I'm set
RobertDowns >> (All): The proposed changes to the revised definitions look good 
to me.
Katia Thomaz >> (All): as iīve said i accept but i think the better hierachy is 
policy > stategy > plan
Katia Thomaz >> (All): ok with me
Marie Waltz >> (All): have we done enough for today?
Katia Thomaz >> (All): folks, i wonīt participate next week because Brazil DST 
started on October 19 and it will be impossible to get here this time.
Marie Waltz >> (All): The meeting is over, I'm copying the minutes now.

-- SimonLambert - 15 Oct 2008

Topic revision: r1 - 2008-10-15 - SimonLambert
 
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform Powered by PerlCopyright © 2008-2018 by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
Ideas, requests, problems regarding TWiki? Send feedback