| Better sharing of 99999 NAAN for test/fake ARKs |
| TC: having ability to forward shoulders under one NAAN is much better than using multiple NAANs; also a convention to support temp ARKs may work better than configuration requirement
RM: could make organizational shoulders that look like the organizational NAANs, so by convention you don't collide, which avoids need to register
JR: for INCIPIT project we want test ARKs w.o. using our own NAAN
JK: maybe accommodate both
BC: BNF could probably use this
KH: should shoulders be a temporary shoulder registration?
JK: that wouldn't work for, say EZID; ironically, there's a long-term need for temporary ARKs, eg, whenever you install a bug fix we mint a fake ARK as a basic test to see if things are working |
| Consolidation of recent concept exploration around X?info - Revisit basic requirements
- return basic information about X
- return a persistence statement
- don't depart too far from original ARK spec
- retain ability to add optional richer metadata
- retain ability to use other formats
- retain spirit of ERC/ANVL/THUMP and Dublin Kernel "story" metadata
- Concept that X can refer to a landing page, and what that means for X?info
- Concept that X can refer to a plunging (non-landing) page, and what that means
- Concept that resolution may in general involve multiple resolvers, any of which might be tasked to respond to X?info (tradeoffs)
- Unknown: can/should we support notion of X referring to one or more of these (avoiding the more challenging terminology of the Networked Entity Model):
- bp (born physical) thing
- bd (born digital) thing
- bc (born conceptual, eg, vocabulary term) thing
- dfp (digital from physical, eg, scanned document)
- dfd (digital from digital, eg, lower res surrogate from master image)
- pfp (physical from physical, eg, photographic print of painting)
- pfd (physical from digital, eg, German wikipedia is printed and bound annually)
|
| JK: (summarize agenda item)
MP: dfd -- when do we know that?
MP: important to know why are there so few implementers of some areas
JK: yes, eg, ? and ?? hard to recognize, leading to change to use ?info RM: some of this is apropos Mario's email about landing page vs resource
KH: also, for the rmap project, the :/ after ark caused problems; even though the "/" is now deprecated, the ":" by itself still causes a few problems
MP: technical challenges implementing certain things create cost/benefit tradeoff that may not be worth it
JK: other things we're doing to make the cost lower is to change recommendation from ANVL to YAML/JSON JK: Also, we could use a place holder to indicate the count below in the namespace created by the ARK, (a kind of enumeration point, as Smithsonian uses it); this could actually be considered a piece of the counting ARKs project
|