LSID Software Gap Analysis
Benjamin H Szekely
bhszekel at US.IBM.COM
Tue Apr 4 17:32:52 CEST 2006
I believe there is too much RDF software out there to make a good gap
analysis. Kevin, I can help you with providing RDF for you LSIDs if you
like.
- Ben
Taxonomic Databases Working Group GUID Project
<TDWG-GUID at LISTSERV.NHM.KU.EDU> wrote on 04/04/2006 05:16:14 PM:
> Ricardo
>
> Do you think this analysis should include a gap analysis of RDF
> software as well , or would it be best to keep this separate?
> I think this is probably a more contentious issue - ie some doubts
> about RDF over XML. I have found setting up an LSID
> resolver/authority reasonably straight forward but trying to
> implement the services using RDF has been a steep learning curve
> (and limited software/tools to help).
> I'll add more later.
>
> Kevin
>
> >>> ricardo at TDWG.ORG 5/04/2006 6:49 a.m. >>>
> Hi all,
>
> I wanted to invite you to help with the discussion and outcomes of
> one of the task groups formed during GUID-1 workshop, the
> LSIDSoftwareGapAnalysis.
> (http://wiki.gbif.org/guidwiki/wikka.php?wakka=LSIDSoftwareGapAnalysis).
>
> The goal of this group is to perform a gap analysis of LSID
> software. That is, we want to evaluate what the current situation in
> terms of available LSID software is, what would be an ideal situation
> and how to get from former to the later.
>
> In more simple terms, we are interested in performing the following
> tasks:
>
> * To describe and evaluate existing LSID software;
> * To identify missing components, or components that need to be
> rewritten or refactored; and
> * To devise a plan to implement, rewrite or refactor these
components;
>
> We then plan on execute that plan above, probably after
GUID2Workshop.
>
> I believe now is a good time to start this process because many
> other GUID task groups have gained invaluable experience in implemented
> LSID resolvers or are in the process of setting one up. We would like to
> tap into that experience to identify limitations on the current LSID
> software packages and identify new components that need to be developed.
>
> If you have set up an LSID resolver or have experience with the
> matter, we would like to know from you:
>
> * Besides the existing LSID software, what components did you have
> to develop to make your LSID resolver work?
> * What tasks were more time consuming in setting up your LSID
resolver?
> * Have you identified any new components that would have helped you
> to set up your LSID resolver? Please describe it.
> * Have you found any components that were hard or ackward to use?
> What modifications would you propose?
> * Have you found any problems or bugs in the existing components?
> Please report them.
>
> Please, respond either directly to me, to the list, or add your
> comments to the respective wiki page
> (http://wiki.gbif.org/guidwiki/wikka.php?wakka=LSIDSoftwareGapAnalysis).
>
> Also, as part of the gap analysis, I started an inventory of LSID
> software at
> http://wiki.gbif.org/guidwiki/wikka.php?wakka=LsidSoftwareInventory.
> Feel free to make chances and additions.
>
> Thanks a lot,
>
> Ricardo
>
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> WARNING: This email and any attachments may be confidential and/or
> privileged. They are intended for the addressee only and are not to be
read,
> used, copied or disseminated by anyone receiving them in error. If you
are
> not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by return email and
> delete this message and any attachments.
>
> The views expressed in this email are those of the sender and do not
> necessarily reflect the official views of Landcare Research.
>
> Landcare Research
> http://www.landcareresearch.co.nz
>
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
--=_alternative 00765AE285257146_=
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">I believe there is too much RDF software
out there to make a good gap analysis. Kevin, I can help you with
providing RDF for you LSIDs if you like.</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">- Ben</font>
<br>
<br><tt><font size=2>Taxonomic Databases Working Group GUID Project <TDWG-GUID at LISTSERV.NHM.KU.EDU>
wrote on 04/04/2006 05:16:14 PM:<br>
<br>
> Ricardo</font></tt>
<br><tt><font size=2>> </font></tt>
<br><tt><font size=2>> Do you think this analysis should include a gap
analysis of RDF <br>
> software as well , or would it be best to keep this separate?</font></tt>
<br><tt><font size=2>> I think this is probably a more contentious issue
- ie some doubts <br>
> about RDF over XML. I have found setting up an LSID <br>
> resolver/authority reasonably straight forward but trying to <br>
> implement the services using RDF has been a steep learning curve <br>
> (and limited software/tools to help).</font></tt>
<br><tt><font size=2>> I'll add more later.</font></tt>
<br><tt><font size=2>> </font></tt>
<br><tt><font size=2>> Kevin</font></tt>
<br><tt><font size=2>> <br>
> >>> ricardo at TDWG.ORG 5/04/2006 6:49 a.m. >>></font></tt>
<br><tt><font size=2>> Hi all,<br>
> <br>
> I wanted to invite you to help with the discussion and
outcomes of<br>
> one of the task groups formed during GUID-1 workshop, the<br>
> LSIDSoftwareGapAnalysis.<br>
> (http://wiki.gbif.org/guidwiki/wikka.php?wakka=LSIDSoftwareGapAnalysis).<br>
> <br>
> The goal of this group is to perform a gap analysis
of LSID<br>
> software. That is, we want to evaluate what the current situation
in<br>
> terms of available LSID software is, what would be an ideal situation<br>
> and how to get from former to the later.<br>
> <br>
> In more simple terms, we are interested in performing
the following<br>
> tasks:<br>
> <br>
> * To describe and evaluate existing LSID software;<br>
> * To identify missing components, or components that
need to be<br>
> rewritten or refactored; and<br>
> * To devise a plan to implement, rewrite or refactor
these components;<br>
> <br>
> We then plan on execute that plan above, probably after
GUID2Workshop.<br>
> <br>
> I believe now is a good time to start this process because
many<br>
> other GUID task groups have gained invaluable experience in implemented<br>
> LSID resolvers or are in the process of setting one up. We would like
to<br>
> tap into that experience to identify limitations on the current LSID<br>
> software packages and identify new components that need to be developed.<br>
> <br>
> If you have set up an LSID resolver or have experience
with the<br>
> matter, we would like to know from you:<br>
> <br>
> * Besides the existing LSID software, what components
did you have<br>
> to develop to make your LSID resolver work?<br>
> * What tasks were more time consuming in setting up
your LSID resolver?<br>
> * Have you identified any new components that would
have helped you<br>
> to set up your LSID resolver? Please describe it.<br>
> * Have you found any components that were hard or ackward
to use?<br>
> What modifications would you propose?<br>
> * Have you found any problems or bugs in the existing
components?<br>
> Please report them.<br>
> <br>
> Please, respond either directly to me, to the list,
or add your<br>
> comments to the respective wiki page<br>
> (http://wiki.gbif.org/guidwiki/wikka.php?wakka=LSIDSoftwareGapAnalysis).<br>
> <br>
> Also, as part of the gap analysis, I started an inventory
of LSID<br>
> software at<br>
> http://wiki.gbif.org/guidwiki/wikka.php?wakka=LsidSoftwareInventory.<br>
> Feel free to make chances and additions.<br>
> <br>
> Thanks a lot,<br>
> <br>
> Ricardo</font></tt>
<br><tt><font size=2>> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++<br>
> WARNING: This email and any attachments may be confidential and/or<br>
> privileged. They are intended for the addressee only and are not to
be read,<br>
> used, copied or disseminated by anyone receiving them in error. If
you are<br>
> not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by return email
and<br>
> delete this message and any attachments.<br>
> <br>
> The views expressed in this email are those of the sender and do not<br>
> necessarily reflect the official views of Landcare Research. <br>
> <br>
> Landcare Research<br>
> http://www.landcareresearch.co.nz<br>
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++<br>
</font></tt>
More information about the tdwg-tag
mailing list