[Go-essp-tech] Access control for data with different QC Level

[Bryan Lawrence]

Hi Martina

> As I understand, you suggest we have separate QC XML documents in the
> data nodes and no ingest or update of the CIM repository, right? This
> sounds to me like an intermediate solution. We should hold it small
> and easy. So, do we really need an XML for every experiment to
> create an AtomFeed out of them afterwards?

I think I am proposing a simple easy solution :-). I'm convinced it'll 
be easy to build, and easy to use. If I'm wrong, it'll not work.

Realistically we'll need to be able to qc datasets at the publication 
unit, which is the realm dataset ...   how we expose that to ESG is a 
slightly different question. I think we should have a feed of xml docs 
(because it there is quite a lot of in the metafor quality package). 
However, we could also have a feed which also just listed the datasets 
and their level. 

> Why don't we just keep small lists with DRS experiment name and QC
> level at the local data nodes or in the gateway?

which is essentially what I'm proposing with the last sentence above, 
but doing it properly (not an intermediate solution) should only be a 
couple of weeks work.

> Additionally, the security mechanism, which asks for the QC level
> attached to certain data, needs to be quick, since the user tries to
> start a data download.

yes, but that's why the gateway should parses the feeds and load them 
into internal tables ...

> By the way, I was told by metafor that quality is now a part of
> several CIM documents like simulationRun or dataObject but not an
> independent document any longer.

Hmmm. I don't understand that! It's not what I think ...

> Maybe your "someone" has already an idea to discuss.

It'll be someone from outside the current group.

> We could keep a second small list with DRS name and DOI link.

This is inside the planning for Han's I think ... but it should exist 
inside this activity too.

> >  - we get qc level one for free (the data can't be published by a
> >  data
> > 
> > node without being qc level one).
> > - given that qc level 2 can only be dealt with at DKRZ, PCMDI and 
> > BADC since it will apply to replicated data, then we only need to
> > deploy the tool there, and gateways will only need to harvest from
> > three places - q3 information can only be made available at DKRZ
> 
> We can provide a link to additional quality information stored in
> CERA2 if someone is interested.

I think the qc documents should be able to have links to external 
content. So yes ...

Cheers
Bryan

-- 
Bryan Lawrence
Director of Environmental Archival and Associated Research
(NCAS/British Atmospheric Data Centre and NCEO/NERC NEODC)
STFC, Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
Phone +44 1235 445012; Fax ... 5848; 
Web: home.badc.rl.ac.uk/lawrence