Palle,
Thank you very much for the minutes as I was unable to attend the Florence meeting. I am particularly sorry to have missed the session on (web)services. Would you know if I can pick it up somewhere in more extensive form than what appeared in the minutes? In that regard, I just downloaded John's paper.
Again thank you very much for your time. Does Copenhagen have some snow? At each winter, I do miss the snow here.
Igor
Igor Perisic, Ph.D.
Research Director
Entopia Inc
1301 Shoreway Road, Suite 302
Belmont, CA 94002
Phone: (650) 2321373
Fax: (650) 8026709
-----Original Message-----
From: Palle Aagaard [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Friday, November 01, 2002 6:00 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Minutes of DC GOV meetings at DC2002
Hi all
Hereby minutes of DC GOV workgroup meetings at DC2002 in Florence
Regards
Palle
Breakout Sessions Report, 14 & 17 October 2002
Minutes of DC GOV WG meetings
Location: Dublin Core conference 2002, Florence
Number of participants. 28
Chair: Andrew Wilson (Co-chair DC GOV WG)
Secretary: Palle Aagaard (Co-chair DC GOV WG)
Agenda was issued with the DC 2002 conference programme
1. Review of work over 20001-2002
2. Progress on the DC Government extension proposal
3. Further extension issues * describing services (discussed on
the 17 October)
4. Guidelines Using Dublin Core for Managing Government
Information
5. Workplan for 2002-2003
1. Review of work over 2001-2002
Andrew Wilson reviewed the activities of the working group over the last year.
Statement on the relation of the DCMI to GILS
Not resolved (Later on the meeting it was decided not to include this item in the future work-plan).
Using Dublin Core for Managing Government Information
Not resolved and not allocated a responsible (Later on the meeting it was decided that this would be included as part of the documentation of the DC-Gov Application Profile and would be dropped as a separate item on the workplan).
DC GOV Application Profile
Is finished in accordance with what was decided in Tokyo. This item is ongoing and has a special mention at Item 2 of this agenda.
Survey of Government Implementation of DC
No real progress has been made on this item except the * not complete
- list at DC GOV homepage. (http://www.dublincore.org/news/adoption/).
Position paper on records management/recordkeeping management Submitted to the Advisory Board in April 2002. This paper and related subjects are to be discussed at a special topic session on 16 October.
Functional requirements for description of government services using DC Paper submitted to the DC GOV mail list in September 2002. This item has a special Item 3 at this agenda.
2. Progress on DC Government extension proposal
Palle gave a brief statement about the work which had been done since the Tokyo meeting * and based on those experiences advised the Group that it seemed best only to handle one element, qualifier or encoding scheme at a time. One suggestion for future work could be an encoding scheme for Audience.
There was some discussion about the possibility of agreeing on, for example, one specific encoding scheme for the Audience element for use in the Government context. This means there can be several local encoding schemes, and this also means the DC GOV WG perhaps could agree on one generic encoding scheme for Audience.
Stuart Sutton (WG shepherd) talked about how the Usage Board had developed their procedures for approving application profiles and new terms at the same time as, for example, the DC GOV WG had developed their new terms for the DC namespace. The DC GOV WG had submitted 3 new qualifiers to the Usage Board for its meeting in Florence. The Usage Board approved one of these qualifiers, which was the qualifier AccessRights
The Usage Board changed the definition of the refinement for broader use, and also included in this redefinition the definition of the proposed qualifier SecurityClassification. The Usage Board had also made corrections to the comments about the qualifier.
The proposed qualifier Date.Acquired was not approved because of similarities with the already approved Date.Accepted.
One of the important issues for the Usage Board is that proposed new terms must have wide commitment in the community. This means that there should be evidence from the members of the working group that a particular qualifier is needed across a broad range of the institutions represented.
Stuart mentioned the working group should see it as a success that one new qualifier was accepted by the Usage Board.
The workgroup then discussed the future steps and activities, especially in regard to the development of new terms and an application profile for DC-Government. Stuart suggested that the DC-Libraries application profile be used as a model for DC-Government.
It was proposed firstly to do the "Survey of Government implementations of DC" to establish if there are common elements or refinements in use by Government implementations of DC metadata, that are not part of the extended DC schema. This would be coordinated by Andrew and Palle.
When this survey is finished it should contain ideas for new terms, which the workgroup could look more closely at, one or two terms at a time, with the intention of including them in the application profile. A task group was formed to progress the development of the application profile. Members of the group are: Ana Garvas-Delic [log in to unmask] Efthimios Tambouris [log in to unmask] John Roberts [log in to unmask] Maewyn Cumming [log in to unmask]
Mary Tan [log in to unmask]
Nancy Brodie [log in to unmask]
Sara Barham [log in to unmask]
3. Further extension issues * describing services (discussed at the second session on the 17 October) (Number of participants: 14)
John Roberts gave a summary of his paper on functional requirements for service descriptions using DC.
The group was pleased with the paper and congratulated John on his efforts. There were several positive remarks about the paper. The working group discussed the definition in the paper for the concept "service". It was generally accepted that services were not only for citizens but also for business. It was also general accepted that the concept (web)service in the paper was not same as the new concept webservice, where the meaning is machine to machine interaction via the internet.
The working group agreed to exchange definitions about the following terms with the intention of eventually developing a typology of
services:
a) service
b) process
c) function
d) transactions
e) channel
f) portal
Specific questions about these terms include: What are the relations between the terms, and what examples exist of their use?
The group will investigate possible connections of Dublin Core metadata to UDDI, possibly to develop a crosswalk, which is part of the new "webservice" concept. Palle agreed to undertake this work.
The workgroup will aslo develop a set of "Guidelines for using DC to describe services". The first task, which John Roberts agreed to carry out, is to map the functional requirements for service descriptions to the DCMES.
4. Guidelines Using Dublin Core for Managing Government Information
This document is to be included as part of the Application Profile to be developed by the task group, mentioned under Item 3.
5. Workplan 2002-2003
Work Item 1
"Survey of Government Implementation of DC"
Continued
Res: Andrew Wilson, Palle Aagaard
Deadline: March 2003
Work Item 2
"DC GOV Application Profile"
Continued
Res: Task group (see Minutes)
Deadline: August 2003
Work Item 3
Provision of DC-based training material/course information
New
Res: Nancy Brodie, Andrew Wilson
Deadline: January 2003
Work Item 4
Exchange definitions about
a) service
b) process
c) functions
d) transactions
e) channel
f) portal
New
Res: Andrew Wilson,
Deadline: January 2003
Work item 5
Investigate possible connections Dublin Core to UDDI with the possibility of developing a crosswalk. UDDI is part of the new webservice concept.
New
Res: Palle Aagaard
Deadline: April 2003
Work Item 6
Guidelines for using DC to describe services
New
Res: Andrew Wilson, John Roberts
Deadline: May 2003
Konsulent Palle Aagaard
IT- og Telestyrelsen
National IT and Telecom Agency
Postadresse: Holsteinsgade 63, 2100 København Ø.
Besøgsadresse: Bredgade 40, 1260 København K.
Telefon: +45 35 45 00 00
Telefon direkte: +45 33 37 92 67
Fax: +45 35 45 00 10
www.itst.dk
email: [log in to unmask]
|
