Group Mailing list Archive

12 Apr 2016

Re: [rda-datafabric-ig][rda-collection-wg] Some thoughts on "Data Aggregations" terminology & concepts

Dear Keith, all,
dear, I had to truncate the subject line, because it got to long during
our debate for the RDA list server. I think this is a really strong
reminder to get settled;-)
Dear Keith, all,
dear, I had to truncate the subject line, because it got to long during
our debate for the RDA list server. I think this is a really strong
reminder to get settled;-)
Am 12.04.2016 um 12:41 schrieb ***@***.***:
>
> Ulrich –
>
>
>

12 Apr 2016

RE: [rda-datafabric-ig][rda-collection-wg] Re: [rda-datafabric-ig][rda-collection-wg] Re: [rda-datafabric-ig][rda-collection-wg] Re: [rda-datafabric-ig][rda-collection-wg] Some thoughts on "Data Aggregations" terminology & concepts

Ulrich –
Many thanks for this clear explanation. I also enjoy this type of discussion. I have a few points:
You said:
Alternatively we also can say, we omit the possibility of correctness proves and use artificial intelligence. In this case we can just use language and, if really wanted, ontologies.

12 Apr 2016

Re: [rda-datafabric-ig][rda-collection-wg] Re: [rda-datafabric-ig][rda-collection-wg] Re: [rda-datafabric-ig][rda-collection-wg] Some thoughts on "Data Aggregations" terminology & concepts

Hi Gary, all,
I agree with Thomas: this now tends to become a more and more
philosophical debate - I like this, and we should continue this perhaps
with a beer in Denver. But to shorten the decisions process here let me
assume that an undoubted goal is to setup the foundations to build
automated processes on collections and try to bring it down to a simple
question:
Do we want to be able to prove the correctness of processes on
collections or not. If this is case, we need a mathematical solid

11 Apr 2016

Re: [rda-datafabric-ig][rda-collection-wg] Re: [rda-datafabric-ig][rda-collection-wg] Re: [rda-datafabric-ig][rda-collection-wg] Some thoughts on "Data Aggregations" terminology & concepts

Ulrich
In response to your reductive assumption in:
>To Gary: of course a collection is something different to an ordinary PID
also in my reductionist approach. It is a PID, that points to a very
special kind of DO. My assumption is, that this is sufficient for all
Ulrich
In response to your reductive assumption in:
>To Gary: of course a collection is something different to an ordinary PID
also in my reductionist approach. It is a PID, that points to a very
special kind of DO. My assumption is, that this is sufficient for all

11 Apr 2016

Re: [rda-datafabric-ig][rda-collection-wg] Re: [rda-datafabric-ig][rda-collection-wg] Some thoughts on "Data Aggregations" terminology & concepts

Dear Jeremy, all
here, as far as I can see from a first look, the definition is relying
on the binary predicate /isGatheredInto/(/x/,/y/), which I couldn't find
to be defined at the given location anymore. So one probably cannot use
this as a definition here, without defining how this predicate function
works in all cases.
But the other way around: if one uses my reductionist definition, the
function /isGatheredInto/(/x/,/y/) is almost trivially to define,
because one just looks, whether PID y is contained in the set of PIDs in

11 Apr 2016

Re: [rda-datafabric-ig][rda-collection-wg] Some thoughts on "Data Aggregations" terminology & concepts

Hello Ulrich,
thank you for the examples - I particularly like the power collection
idea as it could solve very aesthetically some of the issues we get into
once we talk about collections that grow over time but yet should be
somewhat statically referable. I think this also has a new twist on the
API: A rule-based collection might need its own dedicated querying and
creation mechanisms (or at least different parameter sets). When
thinking in terms of collection models, I mostly worked along lines of

11 Apr 2016

Re: [rda-datafabric-ig][rda-collection-wg] Some thoughts on "Data Aggregations" terminology & concepts

Hi Tobias, Gary and others,
in principle each function, that generates (new) collections, could be
used. For example from a given collection one could build a new
collection by requiring restrictions like for example time constraints
on the generation of the DOs it contains. Or one can build a kind of
power collection, the collection of all sub collections.
Particularly interesting generation rules come with the possibity of
following the links given in the collection, either by the PIDs in the

10 Apr 2016

Some thoughts on "Data Aggregations" terminology & concepts

The various types of data aggregation and what we call them has been a topic in several RDA groups.  "Data set/dataset" or "Digital Collection" and "data series" are a few of the frequently used terms.  In the DFT WG snapshot document we had an initial definition of  "Digital Collection" as:

A digital collection is an aggregation which contains DOs and DEs. The collection is identified by a PID and described by metadata.

Note: A digital collection is a (complex) DO.

17 Mar 2016

REMINDER: National Data Service Consortium Workshop - April 4-6, 2016

All, just wanted to bring to everyone’s attention the next U.S. National Data Service workshop coming up in April. One of the aims of this workshop will be to highlight a number of the U.S. software/tools efforts that would be components of a National Data Service.
Kenton McHenry, Ph.D.
Senior Research Scientist, Adjunct Assistant Professor of Computer Science
Deputy Director of the Scientific Software & Applications Division
National Center for Supercomputing Applications
Click here to see this online
[graphic]
[National Data Service]

Pages