Connection Info:

3-4pm Eastern
+1 (641) 715 3660, access code 651025

Notetaker:

matienzo

Attendees:

Juliet Hardesty (Indiana)
sanderson (BPL)
matienzo (DPLA/Stanford)
Don Brower (Notre Dame)

Agenda:

Predicate Decision Tree - feedback so far
- Questions about intended audience
  - Use cases have originated from developers needing to identify predicates to start development work
  - Is this something intended for use for librarians? Current feedback doesn't reflect those use cases yet; Julie discussed about whether ther are similar use cases to hers in terms of mapping existing MODS data, etc.
  - Action: solicit feedback from community members to help identify additional use cases (Julie)
  - Action: specify known motivating use case in existing predicate decision tree (i.e., for developers)
- Action: add note about RDF::Vocab and swap order of common ontologies and LOV
- Range violations
  - May represent split between group doing modeling and development
  - e.g. plan to use dcterms:spatial for URI in MODS-RDF group; GeoConcerns is using a literal instead
  - Suggestion of awareness of range violations because they might impact cross-compatability of models and code
  - Suggestion to document that some applications violate the specified ranges
  - Action: draft up suggested language about range considerations and get feedback
- Editing before HydraConnect to address changes?
  - Use "Suggestions" to signal that the changes are new
Functional Requirements doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1G2LHArFRW-WdttH_YhNmAjf-Oe9EPZWSZQVap7lenQ8/edit?usp=sharing
- Recipe decision
  - Slash pattern and matienzo's comment: are there logical groupings for predicates?
  - Do we see the need for there to be groupings of predicates rather than a general "bucket"
- How do we see the application? Is this a community service or an application that individual institutions run?
  - Perhaps a shared need for this to host vocabularies.
  - Don Brower: if there's an app, we'd probably want to host it locally, because we have local predicates that don't make sense out of our institutional context
  - This perhaps changes the requirements - was this what we were anticipating?
  - It makes sense to represent this in the use cases; perhaps additional features/vocab hosting is where we change development phases and get community engineering time
- Recipe selection/configuration/MVP
  - No strong opinions from most of the group; slight preference for recipe #5
  - Questions regarding implementation
- Development phases
  - How does development start?
  - Suggested by Karen Estlund that if we had a functional requirements document, she could convene a group of developers to start work
- Ready to post for feedback?
  - Yes, sounds like it.

Browser not supported