Dear all,

Roland has asked Harry on DC-General if the registration
mechanism is ready.

It is my understanding that the software has been ready for
testing for awhile, though I believe Traugott wanted to follow
up on some changes that Harry had not yet made (?).

At any rate, the test phase will need a shepherd, but but
Traugott's work duties make it impossible for him to carry
this further before mid-April and there haven't yet been any
other volunteers.  Everyone on the UB will of course need to
be involved in vetting the proposals.

If Traugott could take leadership on this in mid-April, we
would still have plenty of time to test the system before our
meeting in Ithaca.  Traugott (see below) suggests we take three
weeks for a test, starting with proposals we already have.

I suggest we plan to hold the test from April 21 to May
12 (three weeks).  If Traugott agrees, I could get back to
DC-General now and report that the registration mechanism will
be tested in April and May with the expectation of opening
it for proposals from outside in June.

This would put us about four or five weeks behind the target
deadline I had hoped we could reach (see below), but I think it
is very important for the test phase to have a knowledgeable
and committed shepherd to tell people what to do and keep
things moving.  This will also allow each of us to get our
feet wet with the process so that we know what to expect when
we start taking the proposals.

Tom

On Fri, Feb 07, 2003 at 04:44:26PM +0100, Traugott Koch wrote:
>    1. Harry and Traugott will need to establish a Usage Board
>       user account for the testing and monitor the systems
>       messages during the tests.
>
> TK: As soon as the start date of the test is decided.
..
>    3. We need to decide who will conduct a test, within what time
>       period, and how we should proceed.
>
>       For starters, it is not clear to me whether we need to
>       have a "test-only" run, registering fake encoding schemes
>       that we would then scrap, or whether we can plunge right
>       in starting with a few of the backlogged encoding schemes.
>
> TK: Of course, we can use real examples in the test. If everything works
> perfectly well, nothing prevents us from keeping the records in the system.
> I can continue upgrading the DDC record. LCC, UDC, MeSH, LCSH and the Canadian
> Government Cg... (should be still in the system) are up for grabs. Other UB
> members can submit and carry through other important subject vocabularies.
>
>       Also, I believe Traugott has suggested that we start by
>       inviting the AB to make submissions.  Traugott?
>
> TK: This is to get a more realistic evaluation of the public submission
> template and functionality, using a broader reference group. This template
> needs to be understood by the general metadata public in order for the whole
> registry to work.
> This test could start immediately. AB members should report comments and
> problems to the UB list.
>
>    4. We should at any rate set a "target date" for completing a
>       test, evaluating the test and drawing necessary lessons,
>       making any necessary changes to the tool or the process,
>       and going live with the tested tool.  I suggest a target
>       date of April 30 for going live.
>
> TK: OK for me. The (first round of the) tests should be completed in no more
> than 3 weeks, I propose, to leave enough time for changes.

--
Dr. Thomas Baker                                [log in to unmask]
Institutszentrum Schloss Birlinghoven          mobile +49-171-408-5784
Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft                          work +49-30-8109-9027
53754 Sankt Augustin, Germany                    fax +49-2241-144-2352