Indicating note-taker
Time: 10:00 am, Eastern Daylight Time (New York), 4:00 pm Central European Summer Time
To join the online meeting:
Meeting ID: 836 8591 6724
Passcode: 556561
Calendar invitation - ICS file
Indicating note-taker
Specification for the VIVO interoperability use cases :
References to docker for 1.7 and 1.8 on https://wiki.lyrasis.org/display/VIVODOC116x/Docker
https://wiki.lyrasis.org/pages/viewpageattachments.action?pageId=298811785&metadataLink=true or https://wiki.lyrasis.org/pages/viewpageattachments.action?pageId=176488523&metadataLink=true -> it seems like all docs since 1.10 have a PDF of the 1.10 documentation attached.
On the main page of every version documentation a PDF of the respective version can be created and attached. This would be a fixed version. It should be discussed if this should be done or not at all. Upside is the existence of an easily redistributable documentation, that could even be part of a version release. https://wiki.lyrasis.org/display/VIVODOC116x/SPARQL+Queries - The YASQUE website is down since some time. Do we really use YASQUE or YASGUI? I remember a discussion about it a year ago, but I am not sure if it went somewhere.
VIVO Vagrant for VIVO for 1.11. Still relevant? https://wiki.lyrasis.org/display/VIVODOC116x/Vagrant
https://wiki.lyrasis.org/display/VIVODOC116x/Direct2Experts+API Direct2Experts does not seem to exist anymore - the information about the endpoints is interesting, though!
Jessica presented on the Community Supported Technologies Interoperability Project, which she has been consulting on since October-November. She outlined two main user stories for Vivo: depositing publications in institutional repositories and receiving updates when linked publications undergo status or metadata changes. Jessica explained that she is developing specifications for these enhancements, with functional requirements to be completed by the end of June, and suggested using the SWORD protocol and COAR notify for repository integration, with DSpace as a potential proof of concept. She invited team members to provide feedback on the evolving documentation through GitHub comments.
The team discussed implementing SWORD API functionality in VIVO, focusing on two main scenarios: depositing publications from VIVO to DSpace and syncing metadata from external repositories. Bridget clarified that the current project scope only covers one-way deposits from VIVO to other repositories, not bi-directional deposits. The discussion highlighted technical considerations around supporting different SWORD protocol versions (SWORD2 and SWORD3), with DSpace currently supporting an older version. Jessica outlined key behavior scenarios including creating objects with binary files, retrieving service documents, and handling authentication, while questions remained about the level of metadata interface to provide users in the VIVO interface.
The team discussed the process for uploading publications to a repository from VIVO. Christian suggested using the existing metadata in VIVO and transferring it via SWORD protocol to the repository, rather than creating a separate metadata upload mechanism. Dragan advocated for modifying metadata directly in VIVO before depositing files to the repository. Brian proposed a streamlined approach where users could confirm and augment existing metadata in one form before submitting, ensuring it updates both the VIVO graph and the repository submission.
The group also explored the possibility of allowing users to select multiple repositories within the VIVO system, though Dragan indicated that a one-to-one repository configuration might be more common initially, with the option to add multi-repository support later if needed.
Christian highlighted the need for researchers to submit to both institutional and discipline-specific repositories. Bridget suggested focusing on the best-case scenario for specifications, including support for multiple SWORD versions and loose coupling for future protocol additions. Jessica outlined the proposed workflow where VIVO sends metadata and files to a SWORD-compliant repository, which then responds with information like ETAG, file URL, and status document. The discussion concluded with questions about what additional actions VIVO should take with this information, including potential background jobs and in-progress deposit options.
The team discussed object deletion, they decided to remove this feature as repositories typically don't allow deletion but only make objects invisible, and the team couldn't identify a clear use case for supporting deletion. For the CORE Notify scenario, the team identified several open questions about the relationship definition between VIVO profiles and linked publications, leading to a decision to focus on defining the SWORD deposit scenario more thoroughly rather than rushing the notification system.
New issues and other topics
The conversation ended with updates on various pull requests and tickets. There is a question from Tatiana “Is it possible to hide the "Edit this individual" link (next to Admin Panel in the profiles) for specific roles like for e. g. editors ?” Georgy will be in communication with her about this question, it might be that it can be resolved by customization of permissions. There is a lot of outdated information at wiki pages, Christian and Brian will work on that.