Plenary 9 Barcelona Issues Highlights

Plenary 9 Barcelona

PID Kernel Information Session : issues raised during discussion

  • Mutability/modification:
    • What is the meaning of core if fields are optional?
    • Community preference for a mutability flag
    • Is there an expectation that the PID Kernel Information is rarely modified? How does that relate to the lastModified field?
  • Provenance items:  some of the provenance items appear to be unbounded
  • Checksums:  Do providers need to provide a checksum for each item? Just the mandatory? 
  • Trust:   What is needed to assert trust as in one of the motivating use cases?  Use checksum for trust - is that enough or do providers need to provide checksums for each field?
  • Associated metadata:   e.g. if the Digital Object is a video file, you may want to get to the metadata about this type of object to enable analysis. DOI's do this in two ways - in the header information or query metadata as an item
  • Typing:
    • Some of the properties look like Dublin Core elements, but not clear if they are the same - make them explicitly Dublin Core if they are.
    • Need to be more specific on things like dates, as ISO is not specific enoug 
  • Repeatability:  Need to say if items are repeatable or not repeatable
  • Reference to object: Shouldn't use a URL as content format for field digitalObjectLocation as URL is likely to change. Should location not be part of this record, but be provided elsewhere? Persistance of the record rather than the object. primarySourceOf is very useful - similar to RR
  • Use case of being able to tie together records of the same object which may have different names (cf movies which have different names but are the same thing) - but should these be implemented in a separate registry?