Skip to content
Jared Whiklo edited this page May 18, 2016 · 7 revisions

Time/Place

This meeting is a hybrid teleconference and IRC chat. Anyone is welcome to join. Here is the info:

Attendees

  • Melissa Anez
  • Bryan Brown
  • Nick Ruest
  • Marcus Barnes
  • Jared Whiklo 😸
  • Ben Rosner
  • Justin Simpson
  • Aaron Coburn
  • Randy Fischer

Agenda

  1. CLAW & FPR
  2. FITS Web Service
  3. Sprint updates (time permitting)
  4. ... (feel free to add agenda items)

Minutes

  1. & 2. Make use of the Format Policy Registry to make derivatives. It ties into Archivematica and it has an API with a PRONOM ID and it will respond with a list of commands you can use to create derivatives. In Islandora 7.x-1.x this is hardcoded in the solution packs, so the idea was to share this.

    Justin: In Archivematica there was all these rules to specify how to generate or convert objects from one type to another. The FPR was an attempt to remove this from being hard-coded and be an API that could be shared. The goal is that this be a separate tool from Archivematica and Archivematica will be a client of the FPR API. There is hope to get funding for a next version of the FPR. There is a POC module for Islandora 7.x-1.x by Mark Jordan to connect to the FPR and query it.

    What is CLAW's goal and timeline? One of the issue is that it bases the rules on pronom ids. Are we planning on Pronom IDs in CLAW resources? This will be available as part of PCDM, but are we doing it?

    Pronom has no published ontology as of right now. It may be necessary to generate an ontology for the UK National Library as they might not be able to do it. FPR server does not support mime-types right now.

    We are still at the early stages of an ImageService, one thing we can do is that the new version of FITS has a webservice. So perhaps have a microservice that takes to the FITS web service to do file characterization and hopefully get back a pronom id.

    Right now the FPR if you say what tools you have available it will tell you the commands you can run with all the arguments to fill in. This assumes you have the tool locally installed.

    Perhaps the FPR could provide a listing of Web Service endpoints as well that could be used to identify files.

    Randy: We had a service and we broke it up into microservices much like this. The first step is to get the pronom ID and the second is to get the preservation actions for that pronom id. Description service Sample output from a JPEG

    Justin: FPR is not supposed to be the definitive source of these tools, but provide links or access to these resources.

    The way FPR works in practice is that Archivematica pulls the entire database, where we would like to query on a per-item basis.

    Should the FPR server be one central thing or be a local install or federated? How do we share the policies each institution has defined. What about the use of DOAP to describe the FITS service or other services. Define the services or tools, if you are using a web service you might want to know what tools are being used on the back-end for informational or verification purposes.

    Aaron : SSWAP ontology, used to describe services and the semantics of services. API-X has been looking pretty seriously at SSWAP as a way to describe services and how the interactions might work.

    Justin: How would a FITS web service work with API-X?

    Aaron: API-X is a framework that assigns a service on a repository resource, likewise if you create a thumbnail, you might not want to run FITS on that image either. The framework is for dynamically connect the service (say FITS) to a resource in the repository. So a client can find the service, understand the semantics of the service and then use the service.

    Justin: FPR service could be a place to define what a tool is used for, ie. FITS can be used for identification or characterization.

    FPR stores the output of the tool as a Premis event. All Archivematica does is store that, but the plan is look at the PCDM file type "genre". You might have a characterization tool that says for a PCDM:Image I'll run this tool and map the output to a set of RDF properties.

    Discussion evolving from Hydra Technical Metadata Application Profile and Hydra Technical Metadata Working Group.

    Does Claw want to work now or wait? We'd like to move starting now and then adapt as we move forward.

    Justin will add some more comments to ticket 179 - Create a Basic Image microservice or perhaps 212 - Use FITSservlet to extract Technical metadata.

    Some of the Archivematica developers have been following the Islandora CLAW webinars and may have some comments or ideas.

  2. Sprint stuff

    Ben - Creating a Basic File Service to accept a file and put it into Fedora. Do we want to use proxies for files?

    ResourceService can put binaries already.

    What about technical metadata would that be on /fcr:metadata? Can be done with the /{id}/{child} POST/PUT routes.

    Maybe he should move up a level and create the PCDM FileService inside PDX.

    What are we putting UUIDs on? First class resources, anything we want to act on. Objects/Collections/Files but not /members/ indirect containers or proxy objects.

    This pcdm:ImageService could put a binary and determine if it would be the preservation master.

    What would be the structure where the Files would go?

    PCDM-2.0 is now a proposal and could change how all the objects are structured especially around Files. Do whatever you feel is right, we'll probably have to move some stuff around.

  3. How do I get up Docker easily? https://github.com/Islandora-CLAW/claw-docker#quick-start

  4. There is the Drupal 8 Prospectus to please proofread/review. Then take to the next Roadmap committee.

  5. Refactored Alpaca to yank out PR-1

  6. Had a call for the Alpaca POM.xml and prepare for a release, but not until we have a MIT license. Approximately, a month.

This is an archive. For new Tech Call notes, click here

⚠️ ARCHIVED Islandora Tech Calls

⚠️ ARCHIVED Islandora User Calls

Clone this wiki locally