Meeting Notes: 10 May Webconference

12 May 2016

Hi all,

Here are my notes from Tuesday's discussion. Please correct/augment as necessary.

We discussed and decided on a number of issues stemming from Frederik's first round of feedback on the API (

PID Assignment: an implementation of the API should:

  • include a default provider for assigning PIDs which implements the PIT API
  • allow for a client to supply an endpoint for an alternate PIT API provider as a parameter to the CREATE request for a Collection
  • declare in a capabilities call to clients what the default provider is and what providers can or cannot be used (i.e. a whitelist/blacklist)


  • current operations to get the list of supported access types and model types should be assumed under aforementioned capabilities operation
  • additional capabilities to declare include the max limit on # of collection items which can be operated on in a single request (i.e. CREATE, UPDATE, DELETE)


  • POSTs of new Collections should return a single item, not a Cursor
  • Requests which return a set should return a cursor

Transactional and error handling questions on adding multiple items at once to a collection

  • we will restrict scope to support only synchronous requests
  • POSTS which operate on multiple items where not all succeeded should return a FAILED status and provide some way for the client to know which failed and which succeede

Responsibility for dealing with recursiveness (collections of collections) is pushed to the client ? [ my notes on this point are fuzzy ]

Other items: Tobias will apply for a session at P8

Please chime in with whatever I missed.




  • Frederik Baumgardt's picture

    Author: Frederik Baumgardt

    Date: 12 May, 2016

    Tobias had shared his notes with me, so I’ll add the one point that wasn’t covered by Bridget:
    Persistence and consistency:
    - dependent on the final model for persistency, there will probably be combinations of persistency attributes at different levels that are inconsistent
    - e.g. it might not make sense for a persistent collection to entail a non-persistent collection
    - rules and/or supporting metadata might be part of the Capabilities model
    Thanks to everyone in the meeting for a productive discussion, and Tobias and Bridget for taking notes!

  • Tobias Weigel's picture

    Author: Tobias Weigel

    Date: 12 May, 2016

    Hello Bridget, Frederik,
    great, thanks for compiling the notes and sending them over the list!
    Best, Tobias
    -------- Original Message --------
    *Subject: *Re: [rda-collection-wg] Meeting Notes: 10 May Webconference
    *From: *fbaumgardt <***@***.***>
    *To: *Bridget Almas <***@***.***>, Research Data Collections
    WG <***@***.***>

submit a comment