[Esip-preserve] Upcoming meeting planning

[Bruce Barkstrom]

This looks reasonable.

I'll suggest using the Glacier Photo collection for a use case for several
reasons:
1.  It seems to be the de facto case study we've been using
2.  It has both digital objects (the photos) and physical objects (the
original photos)
3.  It has much less versioning complexity (unless we do a use case
that includes scientific processing of the digital images.

In looking at the Wiki, I agree with Mark on the difference between
provenance and context.  We need some concrete illustrations of
the differences between them.  Also, in talking with Alice, she suggested
that "metadata is data that leads to data" -- which I think might be a
more useful definition than "data about data".

Bruce B.

On Tue, Apr 5, 2011 at 12:29 PM, Curt Tilmes <Curt.Tilmes at nasa.gov> wrote:
> We need to finalize plans for upcoming meetings as soon as possible.
>
> The session proposals for Fall AGU are due April 20.
>
> At the last telecon, Mark, Ruth (Mark volunteered Ruth) & Rama talked
> about trying to put a session abstract together.  I'm sure they would
> welcome other input.
>
> Peter Fox set up a wiki ESSI collaboration site here:
>
> http://tw.rpi.edu/portal/AGUFall11_Session_Ideas
>
> (If you joined the RPI portal wiki last year, your account should
> still be valid -- if anyone else needs write access to that page,
> email westp at rpi.edu and Patrick will give you an account.)
>
> My personal advice would be to develop a broad enough concept to
> incorporate all of our Preservation/Stewardship ideas in hopes of
> getting sufficient submissions to achieve an oral session plus a
> poster session.
>
>
> We also need to schedule any workshops/breakouts for the ESIP Summer
> meeting as soon as possible to help with de-conflicting and allocation
> of rooms.
>
> Rahul has started a wiki page here:
>
> http://wiki.esipfed.org/index.php/Jluly_12-13_Summer_Meeting,_Santa_Fe,_NM#Technical_Workshops_and_Session
>
> The plan is for technical workshops Tuesday afternoon July 12 and
> Wednesday morning.
>
> Plenary Wednesday July 13 afternoon
>
> Breakout sessions during Thurs/Fri July 14-15
>
>
> At the last telecon, we had discussed a working session to flesh out
> Preservation Use Cases Tuesday afternoon.  (We could also continue
> that Wednesday morning, but I'm worried a bit about burning out too
> much.)
>
> We also discussed a joint session for Preservation/Semantic Web.  I
> mentioned that to Peter Fox and he seemed amenable.
>
> I'm thinking between now and the meeting, we try to flesh out some
> of Hook's Use Cases here:
>
> http://wiki.esipfed.org/index.php/Preservation_Ontology#Use_Cases
>
> Anyone interested in Preservation Ontology Use Cases, select "watch"
> on that page so you'll get notified of changes.  It would be great if
> each such person could contribute 1 Use Case to build on -- doesn't
> have to be complete/perfect at this point, just brainstorming.  We can
> refine/combine/etc. to get a good set to work from later.  Also keep
> in mind Frank Lindsey's advice from the Winter Meeting -- it's more
> valuable to take one use case through to fruition than to spend a lot
> of time trying to get a set of use cases perfect up front.
>
> Then we plan 1 break-out session (should that be 2?) to have
> Hook/Chris/Peter etc. facilitate interactive Concept Mapping and
> Ontology development building from those use cases.  Could be
> scheduled any time it doesn't otherwise conflict with Semantic Web
> breakouts.
>
>
> Do we want other specific breakout sessions? (Citations, Identifiers,
> Content Standard) I'm torn on some of those -- I don't want to repeat
> the previous talks, but I also think we could make use of some
> face-to-face time to further those activities.
>
> We could have Mark lead a Citations session building on the outcome
> and recommendations from GeoData 2011?
>
> The Content standard is perhaps too detailed to walk through
> completely, but perhaps Rama/John could give an overview and help
> guide us to specific areas that need more input?
>
>
> From the meeting feedback, we have two requests -- 1) Fewer powerpoint
> talks and more informal discussion and 2) Less informal discussion and
> more structured talks.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Curt
> _______________________________________________
> Esip-preserve mailing list
> Esip-preserve at lists.esipfed.org
> http://www.lists.esipfed.org/mailman/listinfo/esip-preserve
>