Notes from Megameeting 8th June 2009

Attendees

BarbaraSierman Koninklijke Bibliotheek, Netherlands
BruceAmbacher UM
JohnGarrett GSFC
KatiaThomaz INPE
MarieWaltz CRL
MarkConrad NARA
RobertDowns CIESIN, Columbia University
SimonLambert STFC

Summary

David reported (through Simon) that a successful test audit has been conducted at IRCAM in Paris.

It was agreed that everyone should make comments on the cleaned-up metrics document dated 20090522 on the wiki by Sunday June 14th, and send them to David and the whole list. They can then be discussed at next week's MegaMeeting.

Actions (see transcript for details):

  • All to circulate any comments on the 20090522 version of the metrics document by June 14th.

Transcript of chat

Mark Conrad >> (All): Hello.
SimonLambert >> (All): Just had a call from David -
SimonLambert >> (All): he is between flights now and won't be able to join
SimonLambert >> (All): but said he will put a report on the preliminary test 
audit on the wiki
SimonLambert >> (All): that was with IRCAM in Paris
Mark Conrad >> (All): What is IRCAM?
BruceAmbacher >> (All): IRCAM means?
SimonLambert >> (All): Not sure of the exact acronym but it is the centre for 
contemporary music
BruceAmbacher >> (All): John, any progress on whether we will do an audit at 
Goddard?
SimonLambert >> (All): They are partners in CASPAR because of the need to 
preserve poss future performance of their works
SimonLambert >> (All): involving electronics/software
BruceAmbacher >> (All): Simon, Is IRCAM part of the national archives of France?
SimonLambert >> (All): I don't think so, Bruce - I think it's independent
Mark Conrad >> (All): Which version of the document is being used for these test 
audits? I am only about a third of the way through the 20090522 cleaned up 
metrics, but there still appear to be some substantial problems with the 
document.
SimonLambert >> (All): I think it would be that version 20090522
Mark Conrad >> (All): So are the audits going to be valid when we finalize the 
document or will they have to be re-run?
RobertDowns >> (All): Some of us provided comments for improving the 20090522 
document.
BruceAmbacher >> (All): i WOULD THINK TEST AUDITS THAT INFORM THE DOCUMENT WILL 
NOT BE 100% VALID BUT CAN STILL INFORM BOTH THE REPOSITORY AND THE AUDITORS
BruceAmbacher >> (All): sorry I hit caps lock
SimonLambert >> (All): I think the IRCAM test took place only a couple of days 
after the 0522 version was available
JohnGarrett >> (All): Hi Bruce,  we will at some point do a audit, but it won't 
be before our Sr. Review in August.
JohnGarrett >> (All): Actually it is in the proposal for our Sr. Review, so it 
will depend on whether the Sr. Review ends up approving it.
BruceAmbacher >> (All): John, Will there be a value to you at that point.  I 
doubt it can inform the document which should be to ISO shortly.
Mark Conrad >> (All): Robert, Did you provide your comments to the entire group? 
I don't remember seeing them.
RobertDowns >> (All): I sent them to David
JohnGarrett >> (All): You're right it may not be of value then for our document. 
So an actual audit may be down the line next year.
BruceAmbacher >> (All): I also sent edits to David - typos, spacing, etc.
Mark Conrad >> (All): Has anyone beside Robert and Bruce sent in comments on the 
20090522 cleaned-up metrics?
Marie Waltz >> (All): Not me
KatiaThomaz >> (All): not me
BruceAmbacher >> (All): What should we accomplish today?  Does anyone have 
issues with the aims of specific text, not typos,
Mark Conrad >> (All): I have a number of substantitive comments. I have not sent 
them around yet because I have not completed my review of the document.
JohnGarrett >> (All): I have not sent any comments
Mark Conrad >> (All): I can e-mail what I have so far, but it will take several 
minutes to do that. How do we want to proceed?
BruceAmbacher >> (All): Simon, Do you have a sense of the current timetable?  
When will the document be sent to ISO?
BruceAmbacher >> (All): How about a "put up or shutup" deadline of next Sunday.  
We can then review the comments on the megameeting.
SimonLambert >> (All): Sorry, I don't know any specifics about the timetable
SimonLambert >> (All): Bruce's suggestion seems sensible
Mark Conrad >> (All): Ok with me.
BruceAmbacher >> (All): Simon, Can your or David send an email to all active 
participants of such?
SimonLambert >> (All): Sure, will do
Mark Conrad >> (All): Can we ask that folks e-mail their comments to the list so 
that we have a chance to look at them before the megameeting?
Barbara Sierman >> (All): I did only confirm to David that my text was ok with 
me (Preservation Planning)
Mark Conrad >> (All): Is there anything else we should address today?
BruceAmbacher >> (All): I will sign off.  Please send all comments to David and 
the list so we can get this document finished.

-- SimonLambert - 08 Jun 2009

Topic revision: r1 - 2009-06-08 - 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