Bamboo and standards

"Standards vs. services. Standards so thousands of services can bloom, or services so scholars can do what they want to do? Services require software development - thousands of unique pieces of software, do we want to do a great project to integrate them?" (W2, Analyzing Directions, Group G)

"Discussion about standards; some fear expressed about preferring to have things emerge rather than have things from the top. Balance between polyculture and monoculture - how do you manage it, because you can't solve it. How the terms come together?" (W2, Analyzing Directions, Group K)

"Need to accept that people will do what they want. Need to create standards that aren't only technical standards, but also research/pedagogical/professional standards. Faculty have a sense for what the appropriate kind of analyses one can do with an image in a journal/on-line. Changes in professions/disciplines that need to come up regardless of technical standards. How can those be disseminated in an ongoing way that corresponds with developments and technology" (W2, Analyzing Directions, Group N)

"What should/should not be standardized? As we look at what we're trying to make work together, we have to decide what it is first." (W2, Standards and Specifications, questions and concerns, plenary notes, group 7)

"How does Bamboo position itself vis a vis standards to meet the needs of scholars? How to engage with professional academic organizations in articulating these standards." (W2, Standards and Specifications, questions and concerns, plenary notes, group 8)

"How willingly and well are various groups using/developing standards? What are the common pitfalls? How do you communicate about standards with colleagues who may be unfamiliar with them? How can Bamboo remain open to new standards or help identify gaps where new standards are needed and participate in developing them? How do we help resolve conflicting standards?" (W2, Standards and Specifications, questions and concerns, group 2 notes)

"3 types of standards. 1) Easiest to pin down are "technical/plumbing standards. have to exist for any practical activity to take place, wouldn't want to intervene in those (Bamboo could make an identification which standards make sense). Doesn't affect methodological consideration; Humanities scholars might not want to comment on TCP/IP. 2) Middle domain of technical standards with methodological impact: TEI, EAD. consequences and benefits for some kind of agreement, but Bamboo might not have a role in developing or requiring those. 3) Domain of practices, standards (workflow, project management) which are very domain specific. standards for peer review, etc. In those areas, PB has even less role to play in terms of requirements, but a strong role for awareness helping people get a grip on those standards, how to make use of them. (W2, Standards and Specifications, risks and rewards, plenary notes)

"Risks: Possibility that the more PB identifies itself with certain standards, more risk of alienation/pushback from the community where there's likes/dislikes. Risk of "tyranny" - too much normalization. Risk of obstructing standards development - meddling, getting out of our depth. Question of how to support graceful evolution of standards." (W2, Standards and Specifications, risks and rewards, plenary notes)

"Rewards: Credibility for work Bamboo does. Interoperability. Facilitating the work of newcomers - prevents people from having to start from scratch. Critical mass. Longevity - standards might tend to lead to greater longevity of data involved. What was in/out of scope? Bamboo has a strong role to play in raising awareness ,value of using certain specifications. Value in adopting specific standards only in "plumbing standards". Liasoning with standards bodies, jointly developed "Bamboo-specific" reflections of their standards." (W2, Standards and Specifications, risks and rewards, plenary notes)

"Working group plan: Develop organizational structure, who should be at the table. Develop inventory of standards/best practices. Concrete examples, sense of where in our taxonomy standards fit in. Relationships within Project Bamboo - how this information will interact with other PB workgroups depending on what mission they have. We shouldn't AUTHOR standards." (W2, Standards and Specifications, risks and rewards, plenary notes)

"There was some discussion of whether the name should include a qualifier such as "recommended" to soften the impact of "standards". In the final analysis we agreed (but not decisively) to leave this out. The group substituted "best practices" for "specifications" because the domain of best practices seemed significant for Bamboo's community (and for the kinds of risks and rewards the group had identified) whereas "specifications" seemed vaguer than "standards" and yet equally technical, not a useful amplification." (W2, Standards and Specifications, risks rewards and plan, group notes)

"In scope: articulating, documenting, and demonstrating benefits that would accrue to use of a specific standard. adopting technical standards as necessary for internal Bamboo operation. endorsing or recommending domain-specific technical standards (EAD, TEI, METS, VRA, etc.) which have methodological impact for scholars; also, basing higher levels of functionality or interoperation on the (optional) use of such standards. communicating and raising awareness concerning the softest kinds of standards: e.g. "business practices" such as work flow, project management. recommending best practices at all levels. articulating the value of standards adoption for the community. acting as a focal point for the humanities community's representation on technical standards bodies, to ensure that humanities perspectives are represented in the future development of these standards." (W2, Standards and Specifications, risks rewards and plan, group notes)

"Priorities for W3: identify stakeholders and types of participants, develop initial rough inventory of standards and best practices, with concrete examples; develop a loose framework for differentiating between types standards, best practices, etc. specifically with respect to Bamboo's appropriate response (adopt, recommend, communicate), articulate how standards issues will intersect with other PB work groups." (W2, Standards and Specifications, risks rewards and plan, group notes)

"Workplan: Identify stakeholders and types of participants in the exploration of Bamboo's position with respect to standards: both to serve as informants and also to be included as representation on a longer-term working group. identify relevant arts and humanities fields (this is a demonstrator). identify relevant professional associations, including interdisciplinary organizations (this is a demonstrator). post these initial lists for review and amplification by the Bamboo participants. use these lists as a map to guide the identification of representatives from each field; these will help the workgroup identify the relevant standards and best practices in the arts and humanities that Bamboo needs to be aware of; also contact representatives from IT, library fields. make sure to identify stakeholders by role and not only by field: e.g. someone who understands material culture, visual culture, etc." (W2, Standards and Specifications, Workplan)

"Select a subset of the fields identified from which to draw an initial sampling of standards and issues or problems, on the basis of which to model a set of appropriate approaches (to be scaled up when larger-scale funding is available). identify the outer boundaries of Bamboo's purview with respect to standards: most technical end, most "best practice" end, significant points in between. identify issues (relevant to standards) specific to each field; try to delegate this to representatives of specific fields. maybe post a query to relevant listservs (demonstrator?). talk to faculty informants." (W2, Standards and Specifications, Workplan)

"Develop a rough initial inventory of relevant standards. query the humanities, IT, and library informants from item 1 above concerning the relevant standards and best practices in their field. issue a query to relevant listservs." (W2, Standards and Specifications, Workplan)

"Tool interoperability; want to specify not only tools and also environments - how well do they play with each other" (W2, Tools and Repository Partners, questions and concerns, plenary notes, group 12)

"Integration strategies - identify what standards we need and advocate for them. Developing strategies that cut across various communities." (W2, Tools and Content, risks and rewards, plenary notes)

"How will existing tools work with to fit the service framework?" (W2, Service Framework, questions and concerns, plenary notes, group 1)

"In addition to providing a URL to a human-readable splash page for each resource held, Bamboo content partners should provide persistent URLs for representation(s) of each resource (and potentially resource components) amenable to analysis, manipulation, re-use, re-purposing by scholarly tools and services. Such URLs should either be disseminated in accord with community standards and best practices (e.g., ATOM, OAI-ORE, ...) or should be made visible from splash pages such that automated resource URL brokering services can "discover" these additional URLs through spidering and associate them as added metadata with base resource. Bamboo could build such a URL brokering service for actionable URLs that would facilitate access by scholarly tools to, in this instance, high-res representation of digital image resources. Personal collection / personal library management tools (e.g., Zotero) should be able to ingest and disseminate not only descriptive metadata about resources of interest, but also metadata about associated components and representations of a resource that a scholar might want to submit to a tool in order to analyze, manipulate, etc. For Zotero, the ingest part might be accomplish through implementation of translators (as in this illustration). These could be developed and promulgated by Bamboo. Tools designed to facilitate scholarly interaction with digital resources should be able to ingest digital resources via URL. Tools should provide human and machine interfaces consistent with Web architecture priniciples -- e.g., so users can interact with tools via their Web browsers. Tools should generate Web-referenceable and preservable representation(s) of output -- i.e., so that tool output can be ingested into repositories and so become digital resources in their own right." (Tools & Content Partners working group, Djatoka-based image cropping demonstrator, 1/9/09)

"Q: Struck by proposal that a goal of Project Bamboo could be reducing needless divergence. "Standardization" alienates people, not another standards body. Would be good if that were included in value proposition." (W3, Perpectives: Content, Q&A)

"Do technologists at your institution believe that linkage of technical materials (service models, service contracts, service endpoints where implementations are actually deployed) to expressions of workflow, procedure, and objects-of-interest as articulated by scholarship-oriented members of Bamboo's community will improve implementations, uptake, or both? Discussions here seem to indicate that they are an important audience. Information from the Atlas may improve implementations that suffer from lack of standards and so on." (Shared Services working group, Program Document Sec 4 - Discussion Draft of 9 March 2009, Elli Mylonas, 3/16/10 comment)

""Bamboo Certified Service" - allow us to influence services being developed in commercial/higher ed communities. PB Certification - visibility, funding, but there's requirements for sustainability, standards, etc." (W4, Program Document Section 3, Discussion of Poll #1, Faculty table discussion, Shel Waggener)

"Notion of services and being able to deploy them - question of specifications, what are we providing to facilitate that, what's coming out of institutions, how do you do replications, other scenarios that move services around, etc. Easy to express ideas, but difficult to do because there's so much diversity involved. Focus on where the standard we're going to adhere to, and how minimalistic is it going to be?" (W4, Section 4 Table Discussion)

"One year:
-Assimilate content and interoperability requirements determined through Bamboo assessment and service definition efforts.
-Synthesize published assessments and surveys of relevant content providers and forge mutually beneficial partnerships that will commit to interoperability development and testing
-Explore Shibboleth as a technical solution to authentication across Bamboo content provider partners"
Two years:
-Produce multiple proof-of-concept builds for support of higher impact use cases (determined by assessment and requirements process), involving multiple data types
-Produce Shib-based authentication method as proof-of-concept. If successful, consider setting a requirement for institutions to join InCommon to be eligible for use of Bamboo API services
-Model scaled-out interoperability architectures (e.g., grid model)
-Set initial requirements for institutions to be open to the Bamboo "pipeline"" (W4 Action Plan - 4.5 Content Interoperability Partnerships)

"Focus here was on PB's role in interoperability piece and dependency on partners. Even discovery layer, search services. Urge to draw distinction where PB would NOT provide its efforts re: content discovery/access. Mini-mission statement: focus on model that will reduce friction, lower barriers to content access, transport access to content/data in ways that scholars need them. Use synthesis, etc. Expected qualities re: standards, issues, formats. Useful discussion re: rights and access control - important as we move forward. This is a point of friction re: multi-institutional access." (W4 Action Plan - 4.5 Content Interoperability Partnerships, discussion)

Bamboo tags: 

Add new comment