ADMIRAL 20110526 project partners meeting
From ImageWeb
Contents
|
ADMIRAL 20110526 project partners meeting: 26-May-2011
- When: 26-May-2011, 11:00
- Where: Room D38 (** NOTE NEW VENUE **), Zoology Department, University of Oxford (http://www.zoo.ox.ac.uk/info/contact.htm)
- Present: DS, GK, AR, BA, MW
- Apologies: SR
Please report to the Zoology Reception on arrival, and ask to be directed to Room D31 (up two floors in lift at back of building, then left out of lift, right down central corridor, last door on left).
Lunch will be available after the meeting, and will be followed by the ADMIRAL Project Advisory Board meeting.
Contacts: Graham Klyne (room B-17, ext 81991) or David Shotton (room B-16, ext 71193).
This meeting page: ADMIRAL 20110526 project partners meeting
Previous meeting page: ADMIRAL 20110317 project partners meeting
Attendees
- Expected to attend: David Shotton (PI, IBRG), Graham Klyne (Project manager, IBRG), Bhavana Ananda (IBRG), Sally Rumsey (PI, OULS). Anusha Ranganathan (OULS).
- Other partners and members of the Advisory Board: Simon Hodson, Paul Jeffreys, Alex Kacelnik, Peter Murray-Rust, John Wilbanks and Max Wilkinson are notified for information and welcome to attend if they wish to and are able, but are not expected to attend.
Goals
Goals for this meeting include:
- Reviewing further progress on Databank deployment and remaining Databank development activities
- Reviewing further progress on ADMIRAL submissions to Databank
- Reviewing progress on ADMIRAL administrative interface for use by group heads
- Reviewing progress in deployment of ADMIRAL with researchers, and noting any feedback
- Discussion of DataFlow project funding and priorities for remainder of project
Agenda
- Introduction, setting the scene, agenda review (DMS/GK)
- Review actions from previous meetings (GK)
- Report on JISC conference demonstration (GK) and JISCMRD international workshop talk (GK/DMS)
- Review recent progress
- stabilization and live deployment of the RDF Databank service (AR)
- progress on issuing DOIs for datasets (AR)
- progress on ADMIRAL platform (GK)
- progress with ADMIRAL roll-out to research groups (DMS)
- Review and coordinate next steps:
- Project conclusion: plans and priorities (GK/DMS)
- A.O.B.
- Wrap up
- Confirm actions (GK)
Minutes
Review of actions
Outstanding from before last meeting:
ACTION: GK/AR: circulate notes about implementation of content negotiation (non urgent, important) - (The thrust is that content negotiation should not be used to access fundamentally different content; e.g. status vs metadata.) *Closed.*
Follow-on actions
(None)
Report on JISC conference demonstration and JISCMRD international workshop talk
Demo of ADMIRAL software at JISC conference worked OK. The demo was necessarily brief, and emphasized the "ordinary" nature of the capabilities provided, emphasizing the provision of desktop-to-repository services in a very familiar environment.
A review of project progress and lessons was presented at the JISCMRD workshop. This seemed to be well-received. A copy of the slides is at http://imageweb.zoo.ox.ac.uk/pub/2011/presentations/20110322-ADMIRAL-reflections-JISCMRD-workshop.pdf.
Review recent development progress
Stabilization and live deployment of the RDF Databank service (AR)
DOI in place and working - still needs some working out (e.g. at what point in process are DOIs issued? Needs policy to be established).
Embargo handling: data and metadata is present
Focus on testing: resilience, performance
Improve search and discoverability. (TODO?)
UI development. (In hand?)
Embargo issues, need to establish policy framework:
- invisible - separate Databank instance (not sure about API)
- dark data: metadata visible )
- embargoed: metadata )
- open and published
Progress on issuing DOIs for datasets
Works, but policy unclear (see above, below)
Sub-package DOIs: DOI resolution by redirect, then sub-URIs for sub-elements
DOI is per-version? Policy unsure.
Getting DOI: choice of user to decide when this happens?
Generally, need lots of work to define policies. Prefer new DOI per version so that data at DOI is immutable.
Summary: core technical mostly done. Need policy decisions in areas of: - DOI issuing policy; what range of choices? Per-version? - Policy for management of assigned DOIs - ...
DOI cost policy: not yet determined, needs to understand how well issues will address their responsibilities.
Progress on ADMIRAL platform
Working through issue list, aiming to complete high priority items, and where possible to address user-requested enhancements. Big task is to implement web framework for user administration by research group leaders.
From April, GK effort allocated to ADMIRAL is reduced to 20%, and then he was off sick for a substantial part of April. Progress has been maintained substantially through the efforts of BA.
The thrust of our work is to stabilize the deployed platform, and address issues and enhancements noted in the issue list (http://code.google.com/p/admiral-jiscmrd/issues/list), focusing primarily on those marked as "high priority". The project planning and management structures have ben duly simplified for this phase, with shorter but more frequent progress reviews that are focused on the issue tracker entries.
There are two areas of additional functionality we are aiming to complete before the end of the project: (1) a Web interface for user management, and (2) packaging the ADMIRAL software to facilitate deployment on different versions of Ubuntu. There are also a number of small improvements suggested by researchers that we shall attempt to address.
Unfortunately, one of the researcher-requested improvements that should have been easy to achieve has exposed another (serious) bug in the Ubuntu platform.
Progress with ADMIRAL roll-out to research groups (GK/DMS)
We have systems deployed with three research groups, but other than the Sllk group, who are moving all there data to the recent NAS facility attached to ADMIRAL, we don't have much feedback.
In summary, very much less progress than we'd like.
ACTION: GK add link to zoo-admiral-ibrg to ADMIRAL project wiki.
Review and coordinate next steps
ACTION: BA - make list of tech issues would like to know about to recreate systems
ACTION: DS - create and submit a data package based on (say) SPAR ontologies.
ACTION: DS - check DataCite requirements and compare with ADMIRAL/Databank metadata requirements
MISSING: creator vs submitter: need additional metadata
ACTION: BA - need to add metadata field(s) for ADMIRAL user, which can be overridden
NEW REQUIREMENT: collaboration space
ACTION: BA/GK explore collaboration space problem; try making collab area read/write for all access
Final report needs drafting
... (with view to possible report via submission interface)
Next steps: focus on web admin of users
User depositing and submitting
Project conclusion: plans and priorities
ACTION: DMS - prepare final report, with help as needed/requested
A.O.B.
DataFlow funding - still awaiting HEFCE approval.
Battling to construct cost-saving case for DataFlow.
(Simon Coles' lab notebooks + Paul Jeffreys' ViDaaS have been funded; DataFlow and Leicester are not yet approved.)
Round table: should we push for Dataflow, given where are are? Consensus: yes, the goals are worthy, even if the fit with UMF is less clear.
Wrapping up
Confirm actions carried forward
(None)
Confirm new actions
ACTION: GK add link to zoo-admiral-ibrg to ADMIRAL project wiki.
ACTION: BA - make list of tech issues would like to know about to recreate systems
ACTION: DS - create and submit a data package based on (say) SPAR ontologies.
ACTION: DS - check DataCite requirements and compare with ADMIRAL/Databank metadata requirements
ACTION: BA - need to add metadata field(s) for ADMIRAL creator/submitter user, which can be overridden
ACTION: BA/GK explore collaboration space problem; try making collab area read/write for all access
ACTION: DMS - prepare final report, with help as needed/requested
Notes
- Issue tracker: http://code.google.com/p/admiral-jiscmrd/issues/list
