Join Zoom Meeting

Meeting ID: 111 536 636
One tap mobile
+16699006833,,111536636# US (San Jose)
+16465588656,,111536636# US (New York)

Attendees - 



Discussion items

2 minHousekeeping and updates
    • Thank you everyone, for attending the meeting! 
    • Make sure all your receipts are submitted to Susan ASAP so she can close the trips out and get you your $$
    • Still in the process of asking Mellon for a 2-month extension. 
20 minTimeline

Please discuss and comment. Questions: 

When will know? 

With 2-month extension - more time to comment and review. 

Oct 28 group meeting: Review of updated UI diagrams

Nov 1: Final UI documents posted on Confluence

Nov. 15: Specs due for Advisory Board review

Jan 15, 2020: Comments due from the Advisory Board

Feb 28, 2020: Comments integrated into the specifications and posted

March 30, 2020: Final report and deliverables due to Mellon

Without 2-month extension - Less time for comment and review. 

Nov 8: Specs due for Advisory Board review

Dec 13: Comments due from the Advisory Board

Jan 1, 2020: Comments integrated into the specifications and posted

Jan 30, 2020: Final report and deliverables due to Mellon

(UI deadlines stay the same)

Outstanding questions from User Story Activity

Shared notes

User stories

Goal here is to clarify that these questions are slated to be answered in the specifications. 

  • User story #2: How do you get back a specific version?
    • This work is slated for the Gateway spec - Tom to tackle this week.
  • User story #6: What does a version even mean? Do we have a working definition of this, and can we capture that now?
    • Also work that is solved but needs to be made concrete with the Gateway spec. 
  • User story #12: How does the Gateway get updated data? Is this still undecided as was written in the notes?
    • The bridge would be maintaining audit data. On the spec level, the gateway is providing this data as the bridge gives it. 
  • User story #17: What kind of information are we restoring with an object?
    • Anything written to a file and included in the deposit. Note that restoration occurred. Up to the repository on the how. 

Are there other outstanding questions from the in-person meeting in need of addressing? 

Audit format - We came up with a set of items to be included. Not comprehensive but instructive. 

Responding to community comments

Will one of the specification writers respond to the comments left on the Preservation Flow page?

From in person meeting:

1) Expectation is that deltas are sent, not the entire object. Send everything the first time, deltas later. Full manifest sent from Gateway- Bridge should know if it already has particular files or not? Send OCFL manifest?

2) Audits are not triggered on request. Audits may cost the DDP money (if stored in Glacier, etc). Audit frequencies are part of the SLA between the institution and DDP.  

3) Relationship between objects and file group IDs is intentionally abstract because the repository and gateway know about object, whereas the Bridge and Gateway do not. Filegroup IDs represent a grouping of files ingested into DDP. Abstraction is injected so that we have a well documented way of taking files on disk and mapping them back to objects in repository. Filegroup is a serialized object. To the DDP it is a grouping of objects. Yes, we should document this better. Don’t necessarily want to use the word “work” to limit the spec to Hyrax. 

  1. Tom will take a pass. 

Action items