Difference between revisions of "F2F Meeting, 4/28/06, Seattle"

From Metadata-Registry
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 2: Line 2:
  
 
1. Review of current work and progress
 
1. Review of current work and progress
 +
 
* Infrastructure, interfaces, data, testing
 
* Infrastructure, interfaces, data, testing
 
* Plans for demo to DC UB
 
* Plans for demo to DC UB
  
2. Open questions and issues:
+
2. General open questions and issues:
  
 
* How do we deal with the Super Properties?  For instance, do we allow people to add things labelled as "Notes" or do we require them to choose among the subproperties (definition, changeNote, etc.)
 
* How do we deal with the Super Properties?  For instance, do we allow people to add things labelled as "Notes" or do we require them to choose among the subproperties (definition, changeNote, etc.)
Line 11: Line 12:
 
* In the NSDL vocabularies, we've listed the sources of definitions but there's no place to put those in skos.  We're thinking it might be a something we should propose?
 
* In the NSDL vocabularies, we've listed the sources of definitions but there's no place to put those in skos.  We're thinking it might be a something we should propose?
  
3. Joe's role with the project (should he choose to have one!)
+
3. Versioning issues:
 +
 
 +
* Melanie's paper on Versioning
 +
* Differences between "history" and "version" and how this translates into user services
 +
* Representing both history and version in the user interface
 +
 
 +
4. Joe's role with the project (should he choose to have one!)
  
4.
+
5.

Revision as of 11:16, 10 April 2006

Registry Project Meeting, Seattle, 4/28/06

1. Review of current work and progress

  • Infrastructure, interfaces, data, testing
  • Plans for demo to DC UB

2. General open questions and issues:

  • How do we deal with the Super Properties? For instance, do we allow people to add things labelled as "Notes" or do we require them to choose among the subproperties (definition, changeNote, etc.)
  • Is historyNote a good place to put term sources, such as we've defined in the NSDL Learning Resource Type vocabulary? We're thinking that the use of skos:inScheme should wait until we do term mapping.
  • In the NSDL vocabularies, we've listed the sources of definitions but there's no place to put those in skos. We're thinking it might be a something we should propose?

3. Versioning issues:

  • Melanie's paper on Versioning
  • Differences between "history" and "version" and how this translates into user services
  • Representing both history and version in the user interface

4. Joe's role with the project (should he choose to have one!)

5.