Skip to main content

Notice

The new RDA web platform is still being rolled out. Existing RDA members PLEASE REACTIVATE YOUR ACCOUNT using this link: https://rda-login.wicketcloud.com/users/confirmation. Please report bugs, broken links and provide your feedback using the UserSnap tool on the bottom right corner of each page. Stay updated about the web site milestones at https://www.rd-alliance.org/rda-web-platform-upcoming-features-and-functionalities/.

New version of the specification

  • Creator
    Discussion
  • #122303

    Dear all,
    Thanks Ulrich for pointing to the double graphic of Steam Concept A, I
    corrected this now.
    And I added a new chapter … we didn’t talked about authentication and
    authorization so far. As far as this issue always is problematic and a
    source of trouble, we may ignore it when implementing the prototype. But
    nevertheless, the specification itself should say at least a few words
    about A&A. So I wrote down a simple A&A model for our collections,
    please be free to tear it apart.
    Btw., I think always sending around a new version of the document via
    mail is not the most efficient way. If you agree, I can put it on our
    DataShare platform and invite you to the share. Other suggestions also
    welcome.
    Have a nice weekend with hopefully better weather than in Munich,
    Tom

    Dr. Thomas Zastrow
    Max Planck Computing and Data Facility (MPCDF)
    Gießenbachstr. 2, D-85748 Garching bei München, Germany
    Tel +49-89-3299-1457
    http://www.mpcdf.de

  • Author
    Replies
  • #133053

    Thomas et all,
    Thank you for including the A&A section. I am working on a use case
    within a data regulated environment (eg HIPPA). Ideas for names to the
    “special users” might include:
    Owner (keep as is)
    Authenticated (in place of public)
    Everyone (in place of anonymous)
    Static data only?
    I personally envision a future need for collections which are dynamic
    (eg not all the data on a specific topic is known).
    With this in mind I would like to suggest a flag or trait defining
    static/dynamic collection data.
    Additionally, to keep consistency at a given point in time, a collection
    might have a “snapshot” collection(s) over various points in time. The
    snapshot(s) would refer to static collection at the given point in time.
    Thank you,
    -C

  • #133041

    Dear C,
    Thanks for your suggestions regarding the “special users”, if nobody
    complain I will change the document.
    Static data: maybe we have to make a differentiation here between a) the
    data which is part of a collection and b) the collection itself:
    a)
    From the point of view of the collections API, it is difficult to say
    anything about the “staticness” of individual items. If an item is
    represented by a PID, then it least we can say we have persistence in
    the meaning that the PID will stay (forever), even if the data is
    already gone.
    b)
    A collection itself was never meant to be static in general. In the
    document, Tobias has defined the property “read only (boolean)”. In that
    sense, a collection *can* be static if read only is set to true, but it
    doesn’t have to.
    Best,
    Tom

  • #133018

    Hi,
    thank you, Tom, for bringing up the authentication topic. I agree that
    the authentication mechanics should stay simple given our current scope.
    I’ve made some additions, see attached. I also prefer to have the
    document somewhere in a cloud working area, so if you can provide one
    that would be good.
    Regarding the topic of static and dynamic collections: This concerns one
    of the most recurring use cases for collections we have seen so far, so
    we try to model it in detail. As Tom explained, these distinctions are
    already visible through the various traits. In the past, I have made the
    experience that this is not an easy topic, deciding for either one or
    the other, but there are some variations in the middle as well, which
    are reflected in the traits. I also see the need for “snapshot
    collections”, which can also be modelled through the traits by calling a
    cloning operation and then removing those traits that would result in
    modifications.
    This also sounds to me as if the API must provide methods to manage
    (add, remove) traits. Not entirely sure whether there is a better way.
    Best, Tobias
    ——– Original Message ——–
    *Subject: *Re: [rda-collection-wg] New version of the specification
    *From: *ThomasZastrow

    *To: *harrison , ***@***.***-groups.org

  • #132992

    Dear all,
    Tobias, thanks for the additions. I put the document into our DataShare
    cloud:
    https://datashare.rzg.mpg.de/index.php/s/YWUxkSd7zqplCDM
    The link is read-only and public available. If you want to have write
    access to the folder, please let me know and give me an email adress or
    – if you have one, your MPCDF user account name.
    Best,
    Tom

  • #132991

    … btw. I’m on a workshop today and can’t join the videomeeting in the
    afternoon.

  • #132990

    Hi Tom,
    thank you for uploading the document. I think we can use the folder to
    add more drafts in the future. I am also currently going through oru
    public RDA pages – is it ok to put the link on our front page?
    Best, Tobias
    ——– Original Message ——–
    *Subject: *Re: [rda-collection-wg] New version of the specification
    *From: *Thomas Zastrow

    *To: *TobiasWeigel , harrison ,
    ***@***.***-groups.org

  • #132989

    Yes of course. The link is readonly, if someone needs write access, just
    let me know.

Log in to reply.