[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Minutes of Meeting on June 16, 2015
The CMIS4DAM TC Meeting 16 June 2015 Attendees: Ken Baclawski, Northeastern University Peter Beemster, SDL Ray Gauss II, Alfresco Software Florent Guillaume, Nuxeo Irina Guseva Carsten Hoffmann, Canto, Inc. Sascha Homeier, apollon GmbH+Co.KG Gershon Janssen 1. Voting Membership There were 6 voting members out of 6 at the meeting so there was a quorum. There were no changes in voting rights. 2. Query Languages The consensus was that the metadata must have these characteristics: a. It must support structured data. b. The metadata must be queryable. c. Relational data is not adequate. d. Namespaces must be supported.Much of the discussion was concerned with the query language. Here are some choices:
a. XPath is succinct and powerful but may not be sufficient. b. XQuery includes XPath and has powerful features. c. A JSON query language. There are several of these but they are not very standardized and namespaces are not well supported. d. SPARQL is mainly for RDF graphs. e. OData is similar to XPath and is a well developed standard but is designed for RESTful interaction which clashes with CMIS. JSONiq is a query and functional programming language that is designed to declaratively query and transform collections of hierarchical and heterogeneous data in format of JSON, XML, as well as unstructured, textual data. (See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JSONiq) However, JSONiq does not currently support updates. It has a data model that extends the XQuery and XPath Data Model. One suggestion was for simple properties be handled using CMIS, but more complex values would be expressed using XML or JSON. But this complicates queries. This could be mitigated by mapping both simple and complex properties to a single data model which could then be queried. One could specify property "names" using XPath expressions which would allow one to get and set properties in a complex structure almost as if they were simple properties. It would be helpful to give some examples on the wiki. 3. Use Cases Irina Guseva moved and Ken Baclawski seconded that the Use Cases published on the wiki be accepted as the first deliverable. The motion passed unanimously. The following are the use cases: CMIS4DAM Use Cases ACTORS System. An entity that complies with the DAM standard. This is more general than the CMIS notion of a repository. A DAM-compliant system need not be a repository. It could, for example, be a web server that supplies content from CMIS repositories or other DAM-compliant systems. It might be better to call this actor a Server. Application. An entity that manages or uses assets. Unlike a system, an application need not be DAM-compliant. Federation. A system that federates multiple autonomous DAM-compliant systems that may be unaware that they are being federated. USE CASES The use cases are arranged in categories of use case for convenience and to relate them with the CMIS4DAM-specific use cases. Metadata access and integration. There is no corresponding CMIS use case. CMIS4DAM addresses metadata interoperability and disambiguation. Metadata interoperability. While virtually all digital asset managers support XMP, there are many other metadata standards. Expression, representation, serialization of that metadata. Metadata disambiguation. Different vocabs expressing the same data points: IPTC as Dublin Core, or any domain-specific fields that are not part of any metadata standard. System-to-System. In this use case, systems interact with each other. The CMIS use case is Repository-to-Repository (R2R). The CMIS use case includes A and B (for documents) but not C or D. One system manages assets that are stored in other systems. Publishing assets from one system to another system. Application-to-System. This is an asymmetric interaction. The CMIS use case is Application-to-Repository (A2R). The CMIS use case includes A and B for documents. Collaboration systems. The ICOM TC has developed a detailed object model for interoperation between collaborative systems. The ICOM object model is, in principle, expressible as a CMIS profile although this has not yet been specified. Desktop systems. Various applications could use a CMIS-compliant repository for managing their documents. This would also be possible for DAM-compliant systems. Asynchronous access. Assets may be accessed asynchronously. In particular, an asset might not exist yet, could be ordered, and the requesting application would be notified (via server push) when the asset is available. The first version of CMIS4DAM will only specify pull coding (polling). Rendition technical information. The technical properties of a rendition will be specified by metadata. This requires the metadata use case. Federated Systems. A system that federates multiple autonomous DAM-compliant systems that may be unaware that they are being federated. Federation enables you to find assets, but doesn't allow editing. Federated Search. A single query of a single node may be used to search multiple repositories. CMIS4DAM does not specify how different metadata standards would be mapped to enable federated queries. Federation instead of migration. A legacy repository would be federated with a new repository. Old content remains on the legacy repository until it becomes outdated or is migrated. All new content is on the new repository. System Integration. For example, between WCM and DAM, between PIM and DAM, between media management and media delivery. 5. Action Items The members should start looking for examples. The wiki can be used for this purpose. Irina Guseva will set up a link to a Google document with the deliverables. 6. Next Meeting Tuesday, July 21, 2015. Respectfully submitted, Ken Baclawski
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]