roadmap
Markus Dolensky
Markus.Dolensky at eso.org
Tue Mar 9 05:27:07 PST 2004
Hi Tony,
Coming back to the proposed roadmap: Speaking from a content provider point of
view there is really only a single date that matters. That is the day when
there is a query adapter* (detailed at EOF message) to a full registry. The
state of maturity of the underlying Schema is secondary to content providers
who want to publish their data.
So, the question is:
Which bullets (1-12) in the roadmap need to be done to reach this point?
Again, this is not about harvesting between registries, but utilizing
registries by applications.
Markus
BTW, thanks Ray et al. for your excellent summary on lessons learned using Schemas.
*)
The server side registry adapter is the piece of software that enables an
arbitrary archive browser (web form, servlet) to talk to the registry through a
standard interface. Similar to a target resolver the idea is that a user will
not query the registry directly, but the archive browser will generate queries
to a full registry dynamically depending on the context of a user session.
Of course, the assumption is that at least one institution is willing to
implement the specifications for such a registry and provide it as an
operational service and not just as a prototype for prove of concept.
Tony Linde wrote:
> We need to develop a roadmap of what we intend to do. I see the two key
> goals for us to achieve as being:
>
> A. Create RM v1.1 (incorporating registry schema)
>
> B. Create Registry Interface (RI) spec v1.0 (incorporating harvesting and
> query interface)
>
> I tried a schedule which had these complete by 31-Mar-05 but working
> backwards from this date made the intervening activities too tight
> (especially considering how long it has taken us to get where we are now and
> given that we should allow 4-6 months for testing new versions of
> standards). So I then simply worked forward from now, allowing us time for
> two more trial developments of the registry schema and one of the combined
> RM v1.1 and RI v1.0. This pushed the delivery of the above out to end of
> 2005.
>
>
> I would therefore propose the following activities as our roadmap:
>
> 2004
> ====
> 1. Publish RM V1.0 to REC status
> 31-Mar-2004
>
> 2. Agree modified Resource Metadata Schema (RMS) draft v0.91
> 30-May-2004
>
> 3. Agree modified Registry Harvesting draft (RH) v0.2
> 30-May-2004
>
> 4. Demonstrate viability of RMS v0.91 and RH v0.2 between projects
> 1-Jun-2004 to 30-Sep-2004
>
> 5. Create draft Registry Interface spec (RI) v0.1 (incl harvesting & query)
> 30-Nov-2004
>
> 6. Agree draft RMS v0.92
> 30-Nov-2004
>
> 2005
> ====
> 7. Demonstrate viability of RMS v0.92 and RI v0.1
> 1-Dec-2004 to 31-Mar-2005
>
> 8. Develop draft RM v1.1 (incorporating schema)
> 31-May-2005
>
> 9. Agree modified RI v0.2
> 31-May-2005
>
> 10. Demonstrate RM v1.1 and RI v0.2
> 1-Jun-2005 to 30-Sep-2005
>
> 11. Publish RM v1.1 to PR/REC
> 31-Dec-2005
>
> 12. Publish RI v1.0 to PR/REC
> 31-Dec-2005
>
> I know that this seems like a long time but the fact is that standards which
> are widely agreed and which have been proved to work do take many years to
> develop.
>
> The key to keeping this effort moving forwards is that we continue to
> develop working versions of the registry schema and the harvesting
> interface. This will allow us to prove that these standards work and to find
> the problem areas.
>
> Feel free to publish an alternative timetable if you think we can deliver
> the standards in less time than I've indicated. And I look forward to other
> comments as well.
>
> Cheers,
> Tony.
>
> __
> Tony Linde
> Phone: +44 (0)116 223 1292 Mobile: +44 (0)7753 603356
> Fax: +44 (0)116 252 3311 Email: ael at star.le.ac.uk
> Post: Department of Physics & Astronomy,
> University of Leicester
> Leicester, UK LE1 7RH
>
> Project Manager, Director,
> AstroGrid Leicester e-Science Centre
> http://www.astrogrid.org http://www.e-science.le.ac.uk/
More information about the registry
mailing list