Versions Compared

Old Version 2

changes.mady.by.user Huda Khan

Saved on

compared with

New Version 3

changes.mady.by.user Huda Khan

Saved on

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

Attendees: Greg, Tim, Jason, Huda, Steven, Simeon

Regrets: Lynette

Actions from 2020-08-21 Cornell LD4P3 Meeting notes

  • Simeon Warner to coordinate work on final report with Michelle
    • Due Aug 31, not yet sure about coordination around partner report
    • 2020-09-11 - Still to do
  • Huda Khan  to reach out to Tracey (cc. Jason) to review/refine discogs plan before taking to Q&A (after September 2nd)
    • 2020-09-11 - Tim and Huda met with Tracey yesterday. She thinks that bringing in information for display is useful, would be better if some information is brought in for discovery (e.g. publisher). Notes -→ Takeaways:
      • Discogs display as it works now (as supplementary information) seems like a beneficial feature
      • Conversation around how supplemental discogs info is tied into discovery would be useful to have.  Discovery involves MARC, indexing, etc. so there are questions around whether we are considering a batch update after the main cataloging workflow is completed?
      • Additional language needed around the display so that end users information (in the case of display-only)
      • ==> AGREEMENT - 1) Move ahead with display of additional data; 2) Continue discussion of what it would mean to add this for search (either add to MARC or just in Solr)

Agenda

  • Discovery (WP3)
    • https://github.com/LD4P/discovery/projects/2 for issues etc. 
    • Preliminary draft of a discovery plan- intended to get feedback: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1zKYW7FQVVNvyd0XjjW0qWznX9PC3jbmOE6Kz_yygPjs/edit?usp=sharing
      • Which to start with?
        • Discogs - everyone likes this, are we OK showing the data. D&A Reps + Tracey would be a good group to think about this.
        • Autosuggest - need to clarify added value of linked data over what could be done with current indexes, and address updates
        • Open Syllabus - can we rely on that project? are there other (linked) data sources
        • Knowledge Panel - 
      • How much does bang-for-buck influence our decision? E.g. discogs would be great for music but that is a relatively small number of items
    • Parallel strands:
      • strand 1: production piece (i.e.: picking features we've already worked on to then push those into production): discogs, autosuggest. Feature branches in the code to work on features in isolation. Still need to discuss discogs with Tracey (post- 9/2). Preliminary pass with discogs features using latest production (from a few days ago) successful (tried on dev vm and will try on ld4p3 demo using continuous integration later)
        • Checkpoints:
          • Discussion with Tracey re. use case and benefitbenefit – DONE
          • LTS engagement re. metadata
          • Production requirements and functionalityfunctionality – Production decision points
          • Discussion with D&A User Reps and dev team
      • strand 2: research: how to go from knowledge graph to an index - what decisions are needed. What are the data sources for each (e.g.: how many Cornell faculty in wikidata)? Present: reviewing data sources and questions. Should have more worked out in a week or two. Main areas of concern: browsing and dashboard... and anything we can do to help patrons navigate our collections and how we can highlight an entity... and what does that mean for the index? How do we capture the relevant bits of the graph for an index? Is there a repo for this? Not yet... but can use discovery repo (https://github.com/ld4p/discovery) we already have to capture any queries or related work.
      • Can we get Blacklight fork to not hit the production catalog every time we do a pull request? Not clear way to specify that all pull requests should go to the fork rather than the main branch from which you forked. Huda is investigating with input from Code4Lib inquiry
    • LD4P3 demo blacklight site
      • Huda looking into avoid PRs on the LD4P3 fork going against the CUL-IT repo 
      • 2020-09-04 - Greg and Huda working on getting deployment from a branch, still issues to resolve
  • Linked-Data Authority Support (WP2) - A key element of this work package is a sustainable solution that others can deploy. Questions of budget for deployment. Need to get all code into LD4P repository. What would a good end-product look like both for our maintenance and for others to use
    • Qa Sinopia Collaboration
      • 2020-09-04 - primarily discussed ShareVDE.  Touched base with Tiziana with questions from the meeting.
        • API 
          • will support search for works and instances (can search CKB or institutional data)
          • will support search of items (items will not be clustered in the CKB)
          • is in the planning stages and they hope to complete the plan in the next 2 weeks
          • goal is to release the API in June 2021
        • CKB
          • will include Instance entities (reconciled master instances)
        • Hubs
          • do not support hubs in the way defined by LOC
          • Opus is their equivalent abstraction (not sure how closely they are aligned)
        • Meeting with ShareVDE technical team scheduled for Tues, Sept 14
    • Cache Containerization Plan agreed with a prioritization of containers
      • 2020-09-04 - Tried switching to Postgres instead of MySQL.  Still having issues.  Tried to get Hyrax docker running as a sanity check.  It also had problems.  Tom said that Docker on Mac has been problematic for folks.  He works on Ubuntu.  Tried to install VirtualBox VM to be able to run Ubuntu, but the install failed.
    • Search API Best Practices for Authoritative Data working group is still working through use cases, this seems very important to take sufficient time
      • 2020-09-04
        • Working on developer user stories.  Not as clear cut as expected.  Some confusion around UI user stories and API user stories.  Working on reorganizing to those two sets.
        • Need to get contact information from Steven to share with PCC.  Looking at creating a survey that will allow for prioritization by PCC and the working group.
  • Developing Cornell's functional requirements in order to move toward linked data
  • Other Topics
    • OCLC Linked Data / Entities Advisory Group
      • Recap of usability test results, API testing (get, search), recap of shapes (gap between wikibase use and ontologies we understanding in the community)
    • PCC Sinopia Profiles Working group
      • Going through large spreadsheet comparing Sinopia profiles with BSR and CSR, close to having a comparison, will be part of report to POCO
        • 2020-08-28: done comparing BSR with existing profiles. Now trying to clean-up the sames/diffs so that the spreadsheet is shareable. Prelim report due soon that might confirm direction or send on new course
    • PCC Task Group on Non-RDA Entities
      • Meeting today to decide on which models to take, e.g. RDA/RDF values vs. abbreviated list of codes
      • Question of going to LC about using/hosting a small vocab of entity types or use an external vocab
      • Write-up will go to POCO
      • 2020-08-28: lobbying for shallow and focused set of entity types that would allow to say (at least in MARC) that we're working with something that RDA does not currently permit and not try to enact a deep hierarchy. Examples: RDA does not give direction on events description (we do this now... Olympics produces brochures... but are also Events with a host, agents, etc.). MARC allows events in both agent and subject... RDA does not have distinction/recognition. 
        • More granular descriptions might happen in places like Wikidata; the Task Group will be attending a PCC Wikidata 

...