where next?

[Robert Hanisch]

Dear everyone,

  I contend that much of the discussion regarding the structure of
registries, metadata modules, etc., is putting the cart before the horse.  I
think we need to build some simple registries based on the RSM document and
learn from experience about how to ultimately structure information.  A
major lesson I learned in the ISAIA project was that it was very difficult
to anticipate all metadata concepts, not to mention finding some optimal
structure, and that the best practice therefore is to start with some
working prototypes and see how far you get.

  RSM is about metadata elements.  It does not define a structure or dictate
an implementation mechanism.

  I think by doing prototypes based on RSM we will learn answers to the
questions that have been raised, such as whether or not certain metadata
elements (Coverage..., for example) make sense when applied to certain
resources.  Last week Mark Voit was working through some examples of RSM for
EPO resources, and you might be surprised to see how often Coverage fields
apply.  You have to think of the metadata elements in terms of how users
might pose queries to the registry.  The primary function of the registry is
to allow information consumers (which may be computer programs) to find
resources.

  It was also interesting talking to Mark, seeing just how confusing some of
the metadata elements are already.  This is criticial feedback, and
information we will not get until we implement and populate prototypes.  If
we make things too complex we will end up with registries filled with
garbage.  I have been reviewing the RSM elements we have collected from the
cone search and SIAP services, and already it is clear that contributors are
very inconsistent in their use of the metadata elements.

  I concur with Roy's view that we should aim for Dublin Core compatibility,
as this broadens the potential user base for our resources.  This is
especially important for our EPO resources and their end-users.

  Thus, to me there are two guiding principles in the registry design:
1) Collect enough metadata to allow information consumers to find a)
complete and b) accurate lists of resources.
2) Make metadata definitions simple, clear, and small enough in number so
that curators can easily and accurately describe resources.

Bob