Date

03 Oct 2014

Goals

Rights Metadata
Agenda going forward
Choose a new chair for RDF working group

Discussion items

Item	Who	Notes
Agenda Going forward	Tom Johnson	Present or Upcoming issues? Converging on general shared assumptions on what our data models look like Explore in the context of Fedora 4 Documentation and communication plans Lots of interest in workshop, and already doing RDF but didn't know about changes in AF7 How to get from Relational DB to RDF? Semantic Web for Working Ontologist New Coordinator: ? Tasks: Ordered Lists, Rights Community Outreach Pre-conference at C4L?
New Coordinator	Tom Johnson	Should RDF Working Group discussion merge with Committers Call? RDF standing section on Committers Call? Talk with Adam
Access Control	Justin	Hydra Rights Metadata - Copyright and Jurisdiction access Fedora could have an ontology that handles the Group/User access control Could be actionable at Fedora or Hydra Level Majority use super user account to access Fedora, Fedora doesn't know who is making request Benefit of using Fedora is that enforcement of Rights (whether from Hydra/Islandora/etc.) Embargo/Lease is more complicated for automation (local decisions on access) Rights metadata should be extensible. Currently hard-coded assumptions around existing predicates Current: "This Object is editable by Group X" Proposed: "Groups have statements about Objects, or classes of Objects" 4 modes of access: read, write, append, control (being able to change ACL) discover: not needed because you can apply read mode to the object, and private on the datastream Web Access Control Ontology Liability: Lots of Objects in repository, so lots of statements for groups Advantage: Update to access control logic doesn't require touching all repository objects, just touch the WAC objects May be compatible with LDP spec over time Is Web Access Control Ontology compatible with needs of Hydra Rights? need a way to get from User in Ruby to a URI and back Specifies independent Objects with statements for: Agent (person or group) Mode (edit, read) accessTo (repository object)
Rights		Access Control could be derivable from Rights statements Oregon Digital Data Dictionary Resource dc:rights dc:RightsStatement class all objects have to have a rights statement, dce:rights and a rights holder (Agent) http://oregondigital.org/copyright Karen and Mark are going to be having discussion on Rights and can provide a recommendation back to Hydra Local Access option: http://www.europeana.eu/portal/rights/rr-r.html UCSD Data Dictionary (proposed)
Embargoes and Leases		Can Access objects know about embargoes and leases? Should this support a workflow of a path for an Object with an embargo or lease? Who has embargoes: majority of institutions Who has leases: fewer, but can see value Do we need straw-person examples of this as well? worthwhile has current implementation of Hydra Access Controls (Hydra 7.2)

References:

Web Access Control Ontology
Oregon Digital Data Dictionary
http://oregondigital.org/copyright
UCSD Data Dictionary (proposed)
worthwhile (UX for hydra access controls)

	File	Modified

No files shared here yet.

Action items

RDF Pre-Conference at Code4Lib
Karen will setup a call, that may be part of the Hydra Committers call
Esme and David will create examples/use cases and generate RDF examples of Fedora Model with statement on the Object, and Web Access Control Ontology. Will report back during next committers calls
- Modes: read, write, append, control from WAC
Karen and Mark are going to be having discussion on Rights and can provide a recommendation back to Hydra. That will trigger further discussion on Rights Metadata in Working Group

Browser not supported