2019-03-22 - Per Tuesday meeting most SHARE-VDE issues resolved for now, Dave is hoping to have progress with LCNAF and LCGFT by next Tuesday
Steven Folsom to reach out to Nancy to see what data we get from the "Profiles Wrangler" survey about QA needs, will then reach out to cohort to check results and see if anything is missing
2019-03-08 - Received a confirmation from Nancy that they are happy to share. The survey closes 2019-03-08.
2019-03-15 - Paloma mentioned before the survey closed that https://www.rbms.info/vocabularies/ and http://www.ligatus.org.uk/lob/ were named. Waiting for a complete list. The former, I (Steven) don't believe, is LOD; we'll have to confirm and come up with a plan.
List of datasets named in the Profile Wrangler Survey:
RBMS (No RDF yet, but the editorial group is working towards it)
Steven Folsom will make sure there is a github issue for each vocabulary and try to find an owner for each. We will need to find out whether there are URIs for these terms – might not be able to support all
2019-03-29 Issues not yet in github
Jason Kovari will check with Tim Thompson whether it is OK to use the same transformation of RBMS vocabs that was used in LD4L-Labs
2019-03-29 Jason talked with Tim and he is willing and able! Action done.
E. Lynette Rayle LDPath gem has two problems: 1) bug in LDPath parsing paths, 2) it is doing load for graph every time it tries to access something (SLOW)... may need to fork LDPath gem to make more efficient since will not need to reload graph every time (for our use case)
2019-03-15 - Tracking in Issue #56, have not yet put example in LDPath repo for Chris
2019-03-22 - Still working on example for LDPath issue. Will hope to speak with Chris at LDCX
E. Lynette Rayle investigate & document algorithm for selection of languages with label and/or no label. In cases like AgroVoc where languages are handled well then we just want to document the (good) algorithm; but in other cases where language information is wrong we need to be able to turn that off (need more config for this)
2019-03-08 - very nearly done... will be in QA release, hopefully today. Config will have wildcard for "all-languages" which will then not select data for just a single language
2019-03-22 - Documentation has been started but still has some TODOs to fill in information. Created issue to track (Issue #61)
2019-02-22 Discussion of whether we are doing anything that will impact our source (MARC) data or whether this work is just additions at the discovery layer (that may come from other sources such as SHARE-VDE clusters) – agreement that we are interested in experiments that will merge any useful data at the indexing stage. If we wanted to move any of this to production then we'd need to have conversations about linking in MARC but that could be done later / if / when. Huda Khanand Steven Folsomwill meet next week to come up with proposals with an assessment of tractability and wow factor.
2019-03-01 Met yesterday and assessed "wow" in spreadsheet, suggested that three: relationships, knowledge cards and semantic navigation have the best potential for "wow". Huda Khanand Steven Folsom to come up with wireframe proposals to present to D&A group on March 19.
Based on D.O.G. and D.A.G. work, generated set of ideas (to elicit feedback). Based on bringing in relationships from external data (that hopefully go beyond what is already in the authorities). Areas to try: cross-references, relationships, other sources (e.g. databases, etc.).
2019-03-29 Wow was added to spreadsheet, consider this done and move on the discovery work planning
Jason Kovariwill discuss in LTS whether there a URIs from Share-VDE data that are useful and might be added to catalog
2019-02-22 – 2019-03-22 ON HOLD until we have the good (with clusters) Cornell data back from Casalini (not sure when expected). Then have discussion in LTS – people will need to see / explore data before forming opinions on utility
2019-03-29 We have what is expected to be the final dump of SHARE-VDE effort. Hope to look at it soon
Jason Kovari and Huda Khan will work on some more expansive user stories that relate well with our collections
Michelle (2019-03-21, email): "June in-person partner meeting in DC: planning hasn't started yet, it would be good to have at least one person from each of Cornell/Harvard/Iowa SLIS/LC/PCC/Stanford involved in the planning. Let me know if you want to take part."
Partner meeting is day after cohort; can we wait to plan until after May meeting?
