Difference between revisions of "F2F Meeting, 4/27/06, Seattle"

From Metadata-Registry
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 7: Line 7:
 
Jon, Damon and Ryan discussed the outcome of their meeting on the previous day. First discussed was how much content we would be storing, and Stuart outlined a first task with NEA and their affiliates, prototyping work with lesson plans.  
 
Jon, Damon and Ryan discussed the outcome of their meeting on the previous day. First discussed was how much content we would be storing, and Stuart outlined a first task with NEA and their affiliates, prototyping work with lesson plans.  
  
Extensive discussion about how extended services would relate to the three(?) basic data stores and services. Some questions remain, primarily how extended services may be formed and exposed, and what the incentives are to keep those services open.
+
Extensive discussion about how extended services would relate to the three(?) basic data stores and services. Some questions remain, primarily how extended services may be formed and exposed, and what the incentives are to keep those services open. The consensus is that updating of the ASN will in future be based on the same model as the registry and the MMS, so that SETDA members can rely on ASN to update and maintain their standards.  This will be managed through the GEM Plone site.
 +
 
  
 
2. Diane and Jon's role in re-enabling GEM data collection and augmentation
 
2. Diane and Jon's role in re-enabling GEM data collection and augmentation

Revision as of 09:47, 27 April 2006

Meeting Agenda and Notes, 4/27/06, Seattle

1. Planning for Metadata Management System integration with GEM data

  • Report on Wednesday meeting with Jon, Ryan, and Damon

Jon, Damon and Ryan discussed the outcome of their meeting on the previous day. First discussed was how much content we would be storing, and Stuart outlined a first task with NEA and their affiliates, prototyping work with lesson plans.

Extensive discussion about how extended services would relate to the three(?) basic data stores and services. Some questions remain, primarily how extended services may be formed and exposed, and what the incentives are to keep those services open. The consensus is that updating of the ASN will in future be based on the same model as the registry and the MMS, so that SETDA members can rely on ASN to update and maintain their standards. This will be managed through the GEM Plone site.


2. Diane and Jon's role in re-enabling GEM data collection and augmentation

  • Budget expectations?
    • Immediate funding
  • Assistance needs?
  • Do we need a formal contract? If so, what are it's components?

3. GEM cataloging/augmentation services

  • How will they operate?
    • Short-term (Immediate needs)
      • Current Consortium Members needing update (GEM XML schema (new) or GEM RDF/XML schema)
      • NEA affilliates--Kentucky & Connecticut
    • Long-term
  • Who will run them?
    • Short-term
    • Long-term
  • What tools will they need?
    • Short-term
    • Long-term