Skip to main content

Notice

We are in the process of rolling out a soft launch of the RDA website, which includes a new member platform. Existing RDA members PLEASE REACTIVATE YOUR ACCOUNT using this link: https://rda-login.wicketcloud.com/users/confirmation. Visitors may encounter functionality issues with group pages, navigation, missing content, broken links, etc. As you explore the new site, please provide your feedback using the UserSnap tool on the bottom right corner of each page. Thank you for your understanding and support as we work through all issues as quickly as possible. Stay updated about upcoming features and functionalities: https://www.rd-alliance.org/rda-web-platform-upcoming-features-and-functionalities/

SWORDv3 and introductions

  • Creator
    Discussion
  • #112691

    Hi Folks,
    Just a quick message to introduce myself, as I’ve just joined the list this
    morning. I’m Richard from Cottage Labs, and I’m working with Neil
    Jefferies (Oxford) and Dom Fripp (Jisc) on a new version of the SWORD
    protocol. There has been some discussion on our stakeholder list about
    packaging formats, and the work of this group came up. I’m here to learn
    from you, and to see what opportunities for re-using
    ideas/semantics/formats there might be for SWORD. It would be great for us
    to be able to attach our packaging support to the wider community, so
    really interested in what you have been doing.
    If you’re interested in the progress of this 3rd version of SWORD since
    Neil spoke at the last RDA event, we have our initial consultation
    documents up on the website here: http://swordapp.org/swordv3/
    Are there any materials for this group that I should read to get
    up-to-speed?
    All the best,
    Richard

    Richard Jones,
    Founder, Cottage Labs
    https://cottagelabs.com || @cottagelabs
    Lantern: https://lantern.cottagelabs.com
    Repository Solutions: https://cottagelabs.com/repository

  • Author
    Replies
  • #131384

    Hi Richard,
    I’d start with these documents if you haven’t already come across them:

    https://www.rd-alliance.org/group/research-data-repository-interoperabil
    (case statement)

    https://docs.google.com/document/d/13BBJ_G-eprhRadIwtDm-GY1duwP7SkrAf8aA
    (Primer/use-cases)

    https://docs.google.com/document/d/1VmmhNMl4ie5zqbCKkf3NDNRHtgdb2SgYF_cE
    (proposed package format description)
    Sword adoption/alignment would be great for getting early adoption of the
    WG recommendations. The packaging document is still work in progress, so
    very useful to get SWORD input now.
    I’m not sure when the next WG virtual meeting is taking place (I’ve missed
    the last couple), but would be very useful to include SWORDv3 on the agenda
    if possible.
    Best,
    Eoghan

  • #131374

    David Wilcox
    Member

    Hi Richard,
    Just to follow up on Eoghan’s comments, our group is in the process of finalizing the recommendation document [1], and we’re hoping to have multiple prototype implementations of the packaging specification to verify that it is adequate for a variety of import/export scenarios. To that end, it would be great to add SWORD to the list of prototype implementations. Let me know if you’d like to discuss in more detail – we plan to present our work at the next RDA plenary in Berlin in March [2].
    Regards,
    David
    [1] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1VmmhNMl4ie5zqbCKkf3NDNRHtgdb2SgYF_cE
    [2] https://www.rd-alliance.org/plenaries/rda-eleventh-plenary-meeting-berli

    David Wilcox
    Fedora Product Manager
    DuraSpace
    ***@***.***

  • #131373

    Hi Eoghan,
    That’s great, thanks for the details.
    Does this WG have a feel on the timeline in which the format is likely to
    be stabilised/published?
    Cheers,
    Richard
    On 22 November 2017 at 17:34, Eoghan Ó Carragáin <
    ***@***.***> wrote:

    Richard Jones,
    Founder, Cottage Labs
    https://cottagelabs.com || @cottagelabs
    Lantern: https://lantern.cottagelabs.com
    Repository Solutions: https://cottagelabs.com/repository

  • #131372

    Hi David,
    Yes, I’d like to talk about what that might mean in detail. On the SWORDv3
    stakeholder list I’ve just asked around to see what people’s thoughts are
    on whether we want to explicitly name this format in the spec as our
    “default” format, or whether it is just another option that people might
    optionally use.
    I’m not sure either situation would count as a useful “implementation” of
    this format, as it would just be named in the spec, but when we move on to
    the implementations phase of our project we might be able to see it
    actually used, which would be great. It would be good to know what you’re
    envisaging, and how we can help, certainly.
    Cheers,
    Richard

  • #131371

    Hi Richard,
    David or Thomas would be better able to answer the timeline question, but
    my understanding is that the WG expects to make its final recommendation
    for the next RDA Plenary in March 2018. Work will be done in the meantime
    to trial implementations.
    Best,
    Eoghan

Log in to reply.