Perla Innocenti & Seamus Ross, Policy Interoperability

Perla Innocenti, HATII, University of Glasgow and Seamus Ross, University of Toronto outlined the main goals, expected outcomes and scope of the Policy Working Group. Summarizing the policy concept in the DELOS Reference Model, Perla Innocenti explained the WG’s proposal to revise the policy domain and develop a policy framework to make  a DL viable. The talk spotlighted seven interoperability issues and explained how policy fits into these.

Key issues explored:

• business-level interoperability: within a policy framework, it is possible to compare and trust values and purposes of each organization.
• the risks of a lack of policy interoperability.

One of the main challenges faced by the WG entails exploring largely uncharted territory in what is an overarching principle for DL interoperability. Seamus Ross brought into sharp relief the main issues identified and preliminary findings, in addition to diverse interoperability scenarios for policy.

Sarah Higgins & Giuseppina Vullo, Quality Interoperability

Sarah Higgins, Digital Curation Centre (UK) and Giuseppina Vullo, HATII, Glasgow University explored Quality interoperability, which is synonymous with the ability of DLs to share a common, qualitative framework.

The talk briefly described the mission and focus of the Quality Working Group within DL.org. Special attention was drawn to key interoperability issues and preliminary findings aimed at enhancing the DELOS Reference Model.

The scope in terms of Quality models can be broadened by defining, selecting and investigating core quality parameters deemed essential for a quality interoperability framework, while fostering new research into best practices and feasibility.

Leonardo Candela, CNR-ISTI, shed light on Architecture interoperability, providing key definitions relating to the architecture domain, outlining the component-based approach and exploring architecture interoperability.

Focal points: component profile with regard to architecture, the application framework and architectural interoperability.

While solutions can be borrowed from other related domains, standards only bring solutions to some extent, hence the need for guidelines and best practices to drive forward interoperability at the architecture level.

Leonardo Candela, Architecture Interoperability

The Architecture Working Group is focusing on the design and testing of interoperability approaches in concrete scenarios, particularly D4Science and DRIVER projects, as well as reference architecture for interoperability-oriented application framework.

Chair: Seamus Ross, University of Toronto

Q&A

“I am pleased to see policy presented and analyzed by a specialist outside the computer science domain. DL.org could build on the many scenarios developed by the 3WC Policy Language WG.“ Stefan Gradmann, Humboldt University.

“It is important to identify what parameters are needed but ultimately it is down to the individual DLs to decide the extent to which they can ensure the best quality.“ Sarah Higgins, Digital Curation Centre.

“We should identify monotone dependencies between quality criteria to see the roots, which would be highly valuable but challenging. Every user is different, so everyone wants different things. It should be possible to measure them.“ Yannis Ioannidis, University of Athens.

“Quality is very challenging. The usefulness of a collection is really difficult.“ Tiziana Catarci, University of Rome.

“We are aware of the challenges. This is a dynamic concept.“ Giuseppina Vullo, HATII, University of Glasgow.