From Filtered Push Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Etherpad for meeting notes: http://firuta.huh.harvard.edu:9000/FP-2012Jul25


  • Status of AnnotationProccessor/Mapper
  • Status of Client Authentication
  • iDigBio VMs


  • Collaborations
    • Kepler
    • Specify/Symbiota
    • SCAN TCN
    • NEVP TCN


  • Paul
    • Developed Kepler Kuration workflows for cleaning taxon name lists for NE VP TCN and for MCZ taxon name data using Lei's IPNI validator and new validators for GBIF ChecklistBank, IndexFungorum, and WoRMS.
    • NEVP TCN TaxaCleanup.png
    • Got draft of high and low MCZ budgets for Kurator in to MCZ financial folk.
  • David
    • Finished implementing Client Authentication using XML Digital Signatures. Have PHP and Java code that will sign an annotation.
    • Deployed new authentication code for use by Symbiota/Morphbank and modified SPARQLPush to only accept annotations from authorized clients.


Filtered Push Team Meeting 2012 July 25

Present: David, Maureen, Paul, Lei, Bertram, James, Heather.


  • Status of AnnotationProccessor/Mapper

Maureen: Integrated specify authorization code into driver, so user permssions on tables can be validated.

Lei: Goal is decouple annotation processor from buissness logic of local database. Need a way for the annotation processor and driver to interact in a gentle way, using a general design with exceptions thrown by the driver to hint to the annotation processor of what needs to be done.

  • Status of Client Authentication

David: SPARQL push can now authenticate clients with XML digital signatures, and added clent code to let clients sign annotation documents. In lightweight annotation system, but not yet in FP Access point.

James: Now that DataOne has a release, it considers it's authentication system as stable. Time to look at that again.

Bertram: Layer to make multiple authentication systems look seamless. Key idea being wrapping other authentication systems.

Paul: Solves user of client identity issues. Doesn't solve client software authorization to network issues.

James: People asking about how to protect annotation store.

Paul: Summary of client-network (annotation, lightweight FP, heavyweight FP) authenticaiton.

James: Email Client?

Bertram: Semantic email discussion in the literature:

This one looks very accessible (as in: nice figures etc) and is more recent: http://www.springerlink.com/content/l34745468m224738/ This one is the earlier work from the database community: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1570826804000198

Bob: My guess is that most users mainly want notification and are happy enough to have links therein to a URL that implements some reasonable query that shows what meets their interest. There are several online and desktop RSS->email gateways that seem to accomplish this. I might think differently after I read these papers.

Lei: Annotation Processor UI can have email like properties, back end logic needs to be more complex, including in interactions with messaging system, sorting, indexing etc.

  • iDigBio VMs

Paul : Ready to work with light weight annotation system with them.

TODO: Put David in touch with folks in Florida to start deploying lightweight annotation system onto their VMs. Non-Tech

  • Collaborations
    • Kepler Kurator business...

current UCD budget assumes 2 workshops @ $20K each: is this correct?

Bertram: Have sketch of UCDavis budget:

James: Looking for number range to talk with NSF program officer.

Paul: Very rough cut from Harvard, waiting for detailed numbers for high/low.

    • Specify/Symbiota

No news.

    • SCAN TCN

Paul: Would like to do demonstration of FP at SCAN meeting, about Aug 15.

Maureen: Would be good to have separate demonstration and development machines.

TODO: Maureen to provide specs for VM for iDigBio for demonstration FP setup.

    • NEVP TCN

Paul: Timeline for discussions with engineering team in OK about September.

    • GBIF NA Node update

James: Meeting last two days. Canadian and American Nodes meeting jointly. Attended remotely. Gave botany 2012 presentation. All people there think annotations are critical Want to make data annotatable - get annotations back to providers and help them clean it, also GBIF wants to do data cleaning itself and serve up cleaned data. CBOL interested in annotating identifications, with among other things well described in AOD, assertions about identification certainty (e.g. reliable to level of genus), related to software based identification of barcode clusters reviewed by humans.

Paul: Would take some minor vocabulary development, but fits well into annotation conversations in AO/AOD.