[stdsreg] StdsReg meeting minutes, 4 June [n020]

["Karl F. Best" <karl.best@oasis-open.org>]

Minutes of the Standards Registry committee
conference call #8, 4 June 2002 [N020]

Attendence: Karl Best, Karen Boehme, Makx Dekkers, Bob Hager, John
Ketchell, Mark Norton, Monica Vago

 (Call hosted by ANSI)

1. Introduction

Roll call and welcome from Karl Best.

John apologised for the late delivery of the minutes, which in turn had
resulted in the lack of an agenda.

The agenda was approved orally, with the major item being the discussion
on Bob's revised draft meta-data.

2. Approval of record of sixth meeting (document N019)

The record was approved with two amendments.

In section 3, Monica, and not Karen as stated, was checking with her
experts that the use of the Dublin Core was acceptable.

It was agreed to delete Makx's intervention at the start of section 4,
which was fully captured and did not add anything.

As a matter arising, Bob had circulated a draft press release for use in
connection with the June 27 summit.  This was welcomed by the meeting.
Makx proposed to add some indications of the main organizations that had
been active in the Committee:  Bob agreed to do this.

3.  Review of the status of action items

Action 5.1. Mark Norton: ideas for using multiple classification
schemes. Further discussion of single vs multiple schemes; follow-on to
action items 4.1 and 4.2 of previous meeting.  Mark said that he was
content with the way the discussions had evolved over the previous two
meetings, and considered the action had been discharged.

Action 5.2. Sally Fuger: input on metadata from ebXML Registry. Deferred
in Sally's absence

Action 7.1  Bob Hager:  presentations on the web.  Bob noted that this
would be done when these had been finalised.  He and Karl would be
making a joint presentation to the Interoperability Summit (Orlando,
27-28 June). Makx informed the meeting that he would also be attending
the Summit.


4.	Metadata draft, version 2 (document N020)

Bob had prepared a complete update of the draft, and introduced this for
discussion.  He had tried to complete all the attributes and add the
mapping infomation to DC, since the previous meeting had preferred to
use this rather than ISO 11179-3 as the reference basis.  He had added
notes indicating which elements had been eliminated by the Committee and
why.

The meeting considered each main outstanding or unclear issue in turn.

a.  Identifier

Makx noted that the DC identifier did not change, but "titles" could do
so, in terms of existing sometimes in translated form.

b. Resource

Bob was not totally clear what the concept related to.  Makx explained
that this could constitute a field providing more information about the
organization in the form of links, or a scope statement of a WG.  Such
links could however also be made through other lines in the table, eg
SDO Committee.  The section could be entitled "contact information", but
the provision of this was not mandatory.

c. Document Status

Some members wanted to see an additional "preliminary approval" stage,
between "draft available" and "final approval", although others noted
that not every standards activity had such a stage as a formal step.

After discussion, the meeting agreed to add this, noting that all the
stages were in any case optional for the user organization.  This would
give:
1. project initiation
2.  draft available
3.  preliminary approval
4.  final approval
5.  document published

Makx proposed also to add "withdrawn", but on the other hand this might
be included within "superceded versions" if required.  Karl wondered
whether some organizations might wish to treat the meta-data as archival
information, which Makx thought was in any case an issue relating to the
overall registry scheme that needed to be considered.  It was agreed to
carry forward the present scheme and flag this issue as requiring
further discussion when the scheme was complete.

Makx noted that document history could be found by accessing multiple
records where these were made available, on the other hand, some
participants had thought we were simply proposing to take existing
records
and update them without retaining the previous versions.  In discussion,
it was agreed that this should essentially be left up to the user,
subject to the Committee's further discussion of the archiving issue.

d. Referenced standards, superceded stadnards, previous versions

The concept of "superceded standards" caused some debate and confusion.
Makx noted that DC used  "replaces" and "is replaced by".  The latter
was an archiving issue, and was therefore used only if the record-keeper
was archiving the data.

The Committee agreed to use "replaces" and is "replaced by".
"Superceded" and "previous versions" would be eliminated.

e.  Language

It was agreed to add this as an additional element, with the
recommendation to use the ISO language codes with regional variants.
Separate meta-data would be needed where the different language versions
were not included in the same document.

f. Rights information

Makx noted that people tended to repeat into the meta-data the entire
copyright statement, for clarity.  In some cases, where the information
was particularly detailed, this could be in the form of a pointer to the
source of information.

Bob noted that several issues such as this one related to best practice
guidance, and some concise guidance was therefore needed, to be prepared
once the main specification was agreed.

g. Security classification

It was noted that Dublin Core was now requiring this in relation to
e-Governement applications.

h.  Eliminated data

The meeting confirmed the previous decisions on this.

5. Next steps

Bob agreed to try to capture the discussions in an amended version, and
make a first attempt at best practice guidance.  An XML representation
of the material should follow.  Bob agreed to try to provide the next
version in good time to allow members to circulate it for advice before
it was discussed.

6. Any other business

None

7.  Next meeting

This was agreed for June 25 (NOTE: different date) at the usual time
(noon ET).  OASIS would host the call.



------------------------------------------------------------------------
Best regards
John Ketchell
Director, CEN/ISSS - Information Society Standardization System

URL:http://www.cenorm.be/isss

Rue de Stassart, 36	email (direct) john.ketchell@cenorm.be
B-1050 Brussels	email (secretariat) isss@cenorm.be
Belgium	                        Tel (direct) + 32 2 550 08 46
Fax + 32 2 550 09 66	Tel (secretariat) + 32 2 550 08 13
Tel (GSM) +32 475 594 828