Samvera Community Wiki
2017-02-23—FileSets WG Meeting
Date and Time
February 23, 2017, 2pm EDT
Connection Information
Google Hangouts: https://hangouts.google.com/hangouts/_/artic.edu/pcdm-filesets
Moderator: @scossu
Notetaker: @Julie Allinson
Attendees
@scossu
@Julie Allinson
@Andrew Myers
@Adam Wead
Agenda
Notetaker?
Review last week's action items (see below)
Validation code
AF Base refactoring
Engagement/LDCX
Discuss public facing name for FileSets
Should convey difference between Files and FileSets
Should be easy to understand and memorize by non-technical users
Further discussion on QA needed? (see takeaways from the previous meeting)
Next steps
Minutes
Validation
Jen and Andrew worked up the sketch into working code:
https://github.com/projecthydra/hydra-works/tree/pcdmuse_validator (see 3 commits, biggest one 17th Feb)
DECISION: keep this in HydraWorks until there's a compelling reason to move it to ActiveFedora
Discussion around where this validator code should be, HW or AF:
composite validator code at HydraWorks level leans us towards HW
standard ActiveModel validations could be used at AF level (Adam in favour of this), ie. validating the rdf:type of an ActiveFedora resource against a controlled vocabulary (doesn't *have* to be PCDM:use, that can be left as an implementation choice)
Discussion of config file for validation:
AGREED: config file at app level; leave it to implementer to replace with qa if they want to
QUESTION: config file has three uses(required, preferred and 'validate that it's in this list'), is that OK?
rdf:type
type is where the pcdm:use properties go
type is a bug, sortov, as you can't change the rdf:type once it's created which raises question of whether type is the right place for this info
ability to apply webac using type is a compelling reason for this to be an rdf:type (allow public access to 'display', admin only to 'preservation' etc.), plus it is describing a 'class' of thing
ideally we want to get to a point where we can change rdf:types, perhaps with some immutable types (hasModel?)
this would be a change in AF
file to file relationships
the other part is the ability to relate files to file (with iana:describes)
the problem here is that it will involve a lot of refactoring in AF, changing association behaviour
Adam - could we have a special kind of association? file_association?
would need to get reflections to work and index them in solr
Wireframes - discussion deferred to next meeting