1.1 --- a/doc/presentations/dave/20190702/notes.txt	Tue Jul 02 07:46:37 2019 +0200
     1.2 +++ b/doc/presentations/dave/20190702/notes.txt	Wed Oct 09 16:53:55 2019 +0200
     1.3 @@ -21,6 +21,9 @@
     1.4  IVOA Astronomical Data Query Language
     1.5  http://www.ivoa.net/documents/latest/ADQL.html
     1.6  
     1.7 +VOTable Format Definition
     1.8 +http://www.ivoa.net/documents/VOTable/
     1.9 +
    1.10  Registry Interfaces
    1.11  http://www.ivoa.net/documents/RegistryInterface/20180723/
    1.12  

     2.1 Binary file doc/presentations/dave/20191009/MolinaroMorris_ADASSXXIX_BoF8.odp has changed

     3.1 Binary file doc/presentations/dave/20191009/MolinaroMorris_ADASSXXIX_BoF8.pdf has changed

     4.1 --- /dev/null	Thu Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 +0000
     4.2 +++ b/doc/presentations/dave/20191009/notes.txt	Wed Oct 09 16:53:55 2019 +0200
     4.3 @@ -0,0 +1,78 @@
     4.4 +disclaimers in intro (from Marco)
     4.5 +---------------------------------
     4.6 +- I'm DAL biased
     4.7 +  + and science platforms are a wider topic
     4.8 +- I'm resource curation biased
     4.9 +  + though they form the basis to work upon: data driven science
    4.10 +
    4.11 +possible disclaimers from both
    4.12 +------------------------------
    4.13 +- I am / we are not _the IVOA_
    4.14 +  + I/we have been asked to give a VO/interoperability view
    4.15 +  + I/we will try to put here questions, not solutions
    4.16 +- mention ESCAPE/EOSC attachment about interperability (WP4) and cloud (WP5)
    4.17 +
    4.18 +[Talk ~outline w/ comments]
    4.19 +
    4.20 +VO technologies within a science platform
    4.21 +-----------------------------------------
    4.22 +- what's good for: 
    4.23 +  + not reinvent the wheel
    4.24 +  + provide data/service resources in an interoperable way
    4.25 +  + basic metadata richness needed to enable science portal operations
    4.26 +  + long term sustainability of the effort to build a (single/project dedicated) Science Platform
    4.27 +- drawbacks: 
    4.28 +  + implementation efforts
    4.29 +  + contributing to a global open standard community
    4.30 +
    4.31 +VO technologies to enable interoperations among science platforms
    4.32 +-----------------------------------------------------------------
    4.33 +- what's the goal
    4.34 +  + enable direct re-use of data/service/code/workflow resources among standalone SciPlats
    4.35 +  + continue working on the ecosystem idea sitting behind the IVOA vision
    4.36 +- where are the hurdles: 
    4.37 +  + interoperable _data_ resources
    4.38 +  + interoperable _code_ resources
    4.39 +  + moving them around in a realistic and reasonable way
    4.40 +- what's there and what should be there:
    4.41 +  + data discovery and access open VO standards (upgrade them as needed)
    4.42 +  + interoperable AAI solutions (talk to GWS, there's work to be done there)
    4.43 +  + network transfer metadata characterization to enable multi SciPlats interoperations
    4.44 +  + code/workflow/container/... discovery and data-plug meta-description (registry matters)
    4.45 +  + IVOA has metadata standards for describing data, we don't have anything for describing code
    4.46 +  + There probably already are some standards for this, so we should find/evaluate and adopt them rather than invent new ones
    4.47 +
    4.48 +Addendum
    4.49 +--------
    4.50 +FAIR return of science platforms
    4.51 +  + they can be poweerful
    4.52 +  + but have to be designed to be so (see all of the above)
    4.53 +
    4.54 +Quick assessment of FAIR in the IVOA, where are we now ?
    4.55 +
    4.56 +Findable
    4.57 +- good for data
    4.58 +- poor for code
    4.59 +- we need new metadata to describe code and execution environments
    4.60 +
    4.61 +Accessible
    4.62 +- good for data (publishing archive data)
    4.63 +- poor for code
    4.64 +- executable code will need more work on A&A
    4.65 +- poor for data (publishing user results)
    4.66 +- do we need public user space to make results accessible ?
    4.67 +
    4.68 +Interoperable
    4.69 +- good for data
    4.70 +- good for code ?
    4.71 +- it works as long as we use standard data formats for software inputs
    4.72 +and outputs
    4.73 +
    4.74 +Re-usable
    4.75 +- good for code
    4.76 +- best practice for code re-use is fairly well documented (GitHub etc.)
    4.77 +- poor for data
    4.78 +- do we need public user space to make results re-usable ?
    4.79 +
    4.80 +
    4.81 +