|
META TOPICPARENT |
name="ObservationProvenanceDataModel" |
Provenance day in Heidelberg, Germany, 2016 June 14th
Follow-up meeting
Participants
Name |
Surname |
Organisation<-- --> |
Arrival time |
Leaving time |
Kristin |
Riebe |
AIP, Potsdam |
14/06 10:15 |
16/06/17:00 |
François |
Bonnarel |
CDS Strasbourg |
June 14th |
June 14th |
Mireille |
Louys |
CDS, Icube, Université Strasbourg |
14/06 9:00 |
16/06 18:00 |
Markus |
Nullmeier |
GAVO / Uni Heidelberg |
N / A |
N / A |
Michèle |
Sanguillon |
LUPM, Montpellier, France |
Frankfurt-Hahn: 13/06/16-23:35. Heidelberg : 14/06/16 depending on program |
Heidelberg:15/06/16-16:00 |
Mathieu |
Servillat |
LUTH, Observatoire de Paris |
14/06 11:00? |
|
insert your name here...
Venue
A room is reserved for us at Astronomisches Rechen-Institut (ARI), see http://www.g-vo.org/edp-forum-2016/venue.html for how to get there.
Topics to dicuss
* Data Model updates
* Structuring a database from the data model
* Storing/serializing the Activity/Entity Descriptions |
|
< < | - AI Mathieu: make a proposition for next meeting (vo-table params? or json? xml?) |
> > | - AI Mathieu: make a proposition for next meeting (vo-table params? or json? xml?) |
|
* Access to the Provenance database |
|
< < | - first version without "parameter"-class, ObsCore like => ProvTAP |
> > | - first version without "parameter"-class, ObsCore like => ProvTAP |
|
* Structure and content of the IVOA working draft
* Roadmap for Trieste (Interop in October) and beyond
* Contributions to ADASS Oct. 2016? |
|
< < | - AI: Kristin: Provenance Overview/Review |
> > | - AI: Kristin: Provenance Overview/Review |
| |
|
< < | - AI: Mathieu: CTA + Provenance |
> > | - AI: Mathieu: CTA + Provenance |
|
* Next Provenance day meeting |
|
< < | - 18.-20. July or week of 22nd August in Paris, Mathieu will check room availability |
> > | - 18-20 July or week of 22nd August in Paris, Mathieu will check room availability |
|
* news : the provenance Week / RDA interest group (little activity) /
Goals as proposed for roadmap (Kristin)
- define minimum requirements for the data model
|
|
< < |
- - finalize the data model (diagram)
|
> > |
- finalize the data model (diagram)
so that it works with only minor modifications for all our use cases including VODML-compliant representation (e.g. using Modelio, Magic Draw)
|
|
< < |
- –so that it works with only minor modifications for all our use cases
- –including VODML-compliant representation (e.g. using Modelio, Magic Draw)
|
|
- have the draft out as official working draft
|
|
< < |
-
- –structure of the draft
- rewrite a concise introduction : AI: Mathieu: goals , provenance definition of term in our context, how it is inserted in context ( what it is not ( Wflow), previous efforts, insert architecture section
- –including minimum requirements
- what is needed and reused from W3C : W3C Core
- –including a section on serialising the data model
- –including a section on accessing provenance data
AI: all : insert questions illustrating provenance usage in Requirements 1.2.1
-
- get the progenitors for a specified dataset (entity)
- give me the history , activities and progenitors for a particular entity
- responsibility view for the agent : who was involved for this activity / for this entity
- get me the activities execution and activity description
- AI all: question to answer: is Activity description part of the model or part of the implementation
- should we plan diff levels of detail?
|
> > |
-
- structure of the draft
- rewrite a concise introduction : AI: Mathieu: goals , provenance definition of term in our context, how it is inserted in context ( what it is not ( Wflow), previous efforts, insert architecture section
- including minimum requirements
- what is needed and reused from W3C : W3C Core
- including a section on serialising the data model
- including a section on accessing provenance data
AI: all : insert examples of questions( queries) illustrating provenance usage in Requirements 1.2.1
- get the progenitors for a specified dataset (entity) give me the history, activities and progenitors for a particular entity responsibility view for the agent : who was involved for this activity / for this entity get me the activities execution status and activity description
- AI all: question to answer: is Activity description part of the model or part of the implementation
- should we plan diff levels of detail?
- details levels : basic, detailed, full?? it is up to the applications and access services --> AI Mireille? all ?: iterate to reformulate more simply
- AI Kristin : rewrite 1.2.4
- AI François add in Previous efforts / IPAW International Provenance Annotation Workshop community
- Assign sections to various writers and decide a deadline: end of July?
|
|
< < |
-
- details levels : basic , detailed, full it is up to the applications and access services --> reformulate more simply Mireille? all ?
- 1.2.4 Kristin --> rewrite
- AI François add in Previous efforts / PAW community
- Assign sections to various writers and decide a deadline
- - July
|
|
- work out relations between SimDM and ProvDM
- – (have at least one use case worked out with both models)
|
|
< < | Agenda
10:00
11:00
14:00
15:00
16:00
17:00 |
| <--
--> |