Changes between Version 7 and Version 8 of InstMeasTopic_4.5DescriptorsObjectsRegistriesLookupService


Ignore:
Timestamp:
04/04/12 11:31:11 (7 years ago)
Author:
hmussman@bbn.com
Comment:

--

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified
  • InstMeasTopic_4.5DescriptorsObjectsRegistriesLookupService

    v7 v8  
    4141=== 4) Meetings ===
    4242
    43 (organized calls or meetings before GEC13?)
    44 
    45 Review conclusions in pre-meeting at GEC13
    46 
    47 Review with working team at GEC13
     43
     44Review with working team at GEC13  [[BR]]
     45
     46Summary of current status  (Giridhar Manepalli): [[BR]]
     47 [http://groups.geni.net/geni/attachment/wiki/GEC13Agenda/InstrumentationAndMeasurement/T5%29%20%20MDOD%20Status%20-%20CNRI.pptx  slides]  [[BR]]
     48
     49 Conclusions: [[BR]]
     50
     51 Good things: [[BR]]
     52  Excellent start [[BR]]
     53  Collaborative Specification    [[BR]]
     54  Great Coverage [[BR]]
     55  Nicely broken down into elements [[BR]]
     56  Mandatory vs. optional elements identified [[BR]]
     57  Genuine Use Cases:  Gathering, transferring, and sharing [[BR]]
     58
     59 Jensen's proposal (NetKarma): [[BR]]
     60  Current:  Identifiers, Descriptors, Holders [[BR]]
     61  Proposed:  Identification, Lineage/Provenance, Constraints/Security, MDO Description [[BR]]
     62
     63 Zurawski's comments: [[BR]]
     64  Too many secondary identifiers [[BR]]
     65  Descriptors should be contextualized [[BR]]
     66  Variations based on the type of object [[BR]]
     67  GENI specific descriptions should be clearly marked and separated [[BR]]
     68  Slight changes to names & enclosing elements recommended [[BR]]
     69
     70 Comments/suggestions based on metadata practices: [[BR]]
     71  Too many optional elements [[BR]]
     72   Too many choices given to users [[BR]]
     73   Users bound to take the path of least resistance [[BR]]
     74   Keep the scope restricted to only mandatory elements – at least in the beginning [[BR]]
     75   Try those out. Implement them. [[BR]]
     76  One size fits all ---- No! [[BR]]
     77   Capturing descriptions, formats, policies, transactions, etc. in a monolithic fashion [[BR]]
     78   Register individual components separately [[BR]]
     79   E.g., Capture legal formats & interpretations in their own records, and reference them here   [[BR]]
     80   E.g., Same with accepted policies [[BR]]
     81  Identifiers cannot be semantic [[BR]]
     82    Domain, sub-domain, and object-type are part of an ID [[BR]]
     83    World view changes frequently [[BR]]
     84    Non-semantic Ids are worth every penny [[BR]]
     85    Search engines & registries mask the opaqueness [[BR]]
     86    After all, IDs are just entities behind the scenes [[BR]]
     87  Object Type controlled vocabulary enumerates apples and oranges [[BR]]
     88   Collection, flow, directory, file, database, gui are not mutually exclusive [[BR]]
     89   Doesn’t help the recipient make any decision looking at the descriptor [[BR]]
     90   Bundle type & format into format interpretation method [[BR]]
     91   Covers too many corner cases, e.g., flow-rate [[BR]]
     92   Expects too many details, e.g., locator (type, access method, etc.) [[BR]]
     93
     94
    4895
    4996=== 5) Open Issues ===