Notes from Megameeting 1st March 2009


BarbaraSierman Koninklijke Bibliotheek, Netherlands
BruceAmbacher UM
DavidGiaretta STFC
JohnGarrett GSFC
KatiaThomaz INPE
MarieWaltz Center for Research Libraries
MarkConrad NARA
RobertDowns CIESIN, Columbia University
SimonLambert STFC

There was discussion of apparent discrepancies that had crept into the working document resulting from the face-to-face meeting.


  • MarieWaltz to draft something for the intro to section A to point out various aspects of a TDR and then make it clear that we focus on preservation in the standards.
  • DavidGiaretta to put corrected renumbered doc on WIki and correct the Wiki text.

BarbaraSierman >> (All): I've only half an hour, what did you think of the evidence
documents overview?
David Giaretta >> (All): Barbara - did you want to describe the spreadsheet?
BruceAmbacher >> (All): I have not looked at it, two three day meetings since the face to face .
BruceAmbacher >> (All): I think evidence should always be mentioned in context.
If we also want to develop a comprehensive set that's fine.
BruceAmbacher >> (All): The lengthy description could include text on the purpose
of gathering evidence and the types of documents created by that repository could qualify.
BruceAmbacher >> (All): right
Mark Conrad >> (All): B.1.8 was moved to Section A. It still shows up in Section B.
Mark Conrad >> (All): B.6. Begins with B6.5. Were B6.1 - B. 6.4 eliminated?
KatiaThomaz >> (All): because it was renumbering
RobertDowns >> (All): B6.1 appears on the following page:
Marie Waltz >> (All): My notes show we deleted B6.1, B6.2 and combined B6.3, B6.4, B6.5 into B6.1
KatiaThomaz >> (All): in my document b6 starts with b6.1
Mark Conrad >> (All): I am looking at
David Giaretta >> (All): Should look at
KatiaThomaz >> (All): yes
KatiaThomaz >> (All): renum.doc is better
KatiaThomaz >> (All): david, we left conditional text in B2.3.1 and B2.7.3
Mark Conrad >> (All): What happened with B.6.? It was drastically reduced.
Marie Waltz >> (All): B6.1-2 were felt to be more about access than preservation,
B6.1 was deleted and replaced with B6.4
Mark Conrad >> (All): B.6. is about access.
David Giaretta >> (All): There was a hot discussion about preservation wrt access
Marie Waltz >> (All): We decided that access was less important than preservation
so access lost a lot of ground.
BruceAmbacher >> (All): Mark, It is the sense that this document is about preservation
and what is unique about a trusted repository that sets up what elements should be measured.
Access is not unique to a TDR.
KatiaThomaz >> (All): but there is one thing that looks strange. the document doesn´t
mention access policies before b6.
BarbaraSierman >> (All): I think you need an access policy explictly
KatiaThomaz >> (All): i do
BruceAmbacher >> (All): We should list all of the functions of a TDR, than focus on preservation
David Giaretta >> (All): Is that an action on Marie and Bernie to add something in?
Marie Waltz >> (All): Yes we do need to say it and bring it up in each section so everyone
is aware that it exists and is part of repository
Marie Waltz >> (All): We can state it very clearly in the policy framework part of A
David Giaretta >> (All): OK Marie
BarbaraSierman >> (All): ok
KatiaThomaz >> (All): ok
David Giaretta >> (All): Bruce - what would you say is missing?
BarbaraSierman >> (All): Sorry need to leave now (no, not the train!)
KatiaThomaz >> (All): bye barbara.
David Giaretta >> (All): Bruce - what would you say is missing?
BruceAmbacher >> (All): We certainly have trimmed down security and tech support so
they should be listed in A as part of the functions of a TDR that are necessary but not
unique to a TDR or totally controlled by the archives.
David Giaretta >> (All): I don't recall that we moved those because they were not
preservation - but I might be wrong
Mark Conrad >> (All): B.6. seems to be talking about two separate things. The Access Policies
in Section A should cover both. Creating 
and disseminating correct and complete DIPs and ensuring that folks that should have
access do and those who shouldn't don't.
Marie Waltz >> (All): I got both points and will include in section A
David Giaretta >> (All): The second part of B6 (B6.2) was about authentic copies etc
David Giaretta >> (All): Not clear that Access Policies should cover that
Mark Conrad >> (All): Where would you put it? In a spearate section on creating DIPs?
BruceAmbacher >> (All): David, Are you saying a TDR can produce unauthentic copies?
David Giaretta >> (All): No - the metric in B says that it procuces authentic copies
David Giaretta >> (All): Should a policy repreat the metrics? - Maybe so!
David Giaretta >> (All): OK I see what you mean
David Giaretta >> (All): In terms of B1.8 - should I put up another version?
Mark Conrad >> (All): It wouldn't hurt to put up a revised version deleting B.1.8.
Marie Waltz >> (All): I'm not sure I did but I can create one which I think others need
to comment on
Marie Waltz >> (All): I'll post to the Wiki
David Giaretta >> (All): OK marie will draft something for the Intro to A to point out
various aspects of a TDR and then make it clear that we focus on preservation in the standards
KatiaThomaz >> (All): ok
David Giaretta >> (All): ACTION: DG to put corrected renumbered doc on WIki and
correct the Wiki text
Mark Conrad >> (All): B.1.8. and B.6. were the only things that I noticed.
David Giaretta >> (All): OK
Mark Conrad >> (All): Ok.
Marie Waltz >> (All): Sounds good
JohnGarrett >> (All): OK
BruceAmbacher >> (All): Ok.  I will try to get to parts of B2
RobertDowns >> (All): ok
David Giaretta >> (All): OK - bye folks

-- SimonLambert - 02 Mar 2009

Topic revision: r1 - 2009-03-02 - SimonLambert
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform Powered by PerlCopyright © 2008-2019 by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
Ideas, requests, problems regarding TWiki? Send feedback