[Go-essp-tech] CMIP5 Version directory structure update

[stephen.pascoe at stfc.ac.uk]

Hi Bryan,

> * Yes, and we'll have to increment those documents version to conform
with any changes to the realm 
> datasets, even if they themselves don't change.
>
> This nicely contradicts something I was saying at the sprint: that we
could do the associations with a 
> query. I should have known better. The registry world deals with these
sorts of associations as first 
> class objects in their own right. So, eg, we should have:
>  s: a simulatoin description (v1)
>  d1, and d2: two realm descriptoins (v1)
>  a1: the association from s to d1 and d2 (at v1)
>

This is confusing me a little.  Are you suggesting s, d<n> and a<n> are
all independently versioned?  Any class that you want to version
effectively introduces a second class, the "class version".  E.g. in
CMIP5 we have "datasets" and "dataset versions".  I can see us getting
into a mess if we have "simulation versions" and "association versions".
Would it be better to just have "association versions" and point the DOI
to that?  What is the use case for versioning the simulation metadata?

S.

---
Stephen Pascoe  +44 (0)1235 445980
British Atmospheric Data Centre
Rutherford Appleton Laboratory

-----Original Message-----
From: Bryan Lawrence [mailto:bryan.lawrence at stfc.ac.uk] 
Sent: 10 June 2010 15:09
To: Martina Stockhause
Cc: go-essp-tech at ucar.edu; Pascoe, Stephen (STFC,RAL,SSTD); A.
Treshansky
Subject: Re: [Go-essp-tech] CMIP5 Version directory structure update

Hi Martina

> Sorry. I meant that we assign DOIs in two granularities: One as you 
> described for the group of datasets belonging to a simulation
>  (metafor) / experiment (DRS level); and the second for coarser  
> citations for the data produced by a whole modelling center or by  one

> GCM of a modelling center. This was for citation convenience for  
> publications that analyse and compare many CMIP5 simulations.

OK, I understand what you intend (but didn't know - or forgot - you
planned to do so), but what do you expect those DOIs to land on?

Currently we expect the DOIs for the simulation to resolve to the
metafor page for the simulation (but see below *)

We currently have no logical CIM document which makes sense for landing
on a centre or a model.... and I'm not sure it makes real sense either: 
academia doesn't have a DOI for normal publication aggregatoins - apart
from those which are published as deliberate anthologies ... when would
one publish these aggregations? At the end of CMIP5, at the close off
date for the IPCC ...???  How would we deal with these in the q.c. 
sense? We'd end up with a new level of versioning for the centre and the
model ... (and only wrt to their use, not them themselves).

> > My understanding is that there
> > will will be DOIs that point to simulations (which are run by models

> > at institutes on platforms in conformance to experiments).
> > Those documents will point to mulitiple realm datasets.

* Yes, and we'll have to increment those documents version to conform
with any changes to the realm datasets, even if they themselves don't
change.

This nicely contradicts something I was saying at the sprint: that we
could do the associations with a query. I should have known better. The
registry world deals with these sorts of asociatoins as first class
objects in their own right. So, eg, we should have:
 s: a simulatoin description (v1)
 d1, and d2: two realm descriptoins (v1)
 a1: the association from s to d1 and d2 (at v1)

The citation will need to point to a1, not s, and be rendered
accordingly (one doesn't render a1, one renders s with the associations
denoted in a1).

If new versions of data are released, then even if s doesn't change, a
new association group can be created, and a new doi to point at that.

I don't think the CIM (currently) handles this gracefully. It will
within a week or so :-)  (It would have had we really gone down the OGC
route properly where this stuff has already been thought through in the
context of ebRIM).

Hopefully that'll handle these issues.

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
--
Scanned by iCritical.
-- 
Scanned by iCritical.