**NOTES FROM FALL 2008 FACE TO FACE BOARD MEETING AT DLF FALL FORUM,
PROVIDENCE, RI**

**10 November 2008**

Board members present: Tobias, Rob, Nancy, Joachim, Brian, Rick, Markus,
Robin, Adam, Arwen, Clay, Terry, Richard G. by telephone for part of the
time.

 

Absent: Patrick Yott

 

Guests: Scott Savagio & Marilyn Raichle, Open Collections Program,
Harvard University, Ingrid Finnane, National Library of Australia

 

Final Agenda:

 

Breakfast: 8:30 - 9 am, Washington Room, 3rd Floor, Westin Providence

1.  9 - 9:15 am Welcome & Orientation to new Board members (Nancy)

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
2.  9:15 - 10:15 am Self Introduction of Board members in conjunction
    with Quick Round robin updates / announcements from individual Board
    members, if any

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
3.  10:15 - 10:30 am Board administrative structure evaluation &
    Technical Co-chair replacement (Nancy)

    10:30 - 10:45 Break

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
4.  10:45 - 12:30 METS Schema Version 1.8 changes (Rick)

    -   METS schema documentation & METS Primer harmonization

    -   Schema revision requests

    -   METS Profile schema revisions

        12:30 - 1:30 pm Lunch

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
5.  1:30 - 2:15 METS Profile Development (Jenn & Brian)

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
6.  2:15 - 3 pm METS & SKOS exploration (Clay?)

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
7.  3 - 3:30 pm METS Website & Documentation maintenance Update (Rick &
    Robin?)

    -   Live examples page

    -   Profile submission page

    -   Registry information

        3:30 - 4 pm Break

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
8.  4 - 4:15 pm METS & OAI-ORE (Nancy) See new OAI-ORE spec at
    [[http://www.openarchives.org/ore/1.0/toc.html]{.underline}](http://www.openarchives.org/ore/1.0/toc.html)

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
9.  4:15 - 4:45 pm METS & web archiving (Tobias) See
    [[http://www.bl.uk/ipres2008/ipres2008-proceedings.pdf]{.underline}](http://www.bl.uk/ipres2008/ipres2008-proceedings.pdf), p.
    169.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
10. 4:45 - 5:15 pm METS Event planning & meeting schedules for 2009
    (Nancy)

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
11. 5:15 - 5:30 pm Review of Active Issues list at:
    [[http://www.socialtext.net/p-mets-board/index.cgi?active_tasks]{.underline}](http://www.socialtext.net/p-mets-board/index.cgi?active_tasks)

     

    Pasted from
    \<[[http://www.socialtext.net/mim-2006/index.cgi?draft_agenda_10_november_2008]{.underline}](http://www.socialtext.net/mim-2006/index.cgi?draft_agenda_10_november_2008)\>

     

    **NOTES:**

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
1.  **Orientation: (Nancy)**

-   METS website:

    -   Noting distinction b/w technical and community development
        representing the mission of the Board

    -   METS Editorial Board link includes Mission Statement, Board
        expectations (incl 3 yrs with auto renewal), final version of
        Board meeting notes, agreed upon B

    -   Schema and documentation areas including the METS Primer,
        Overview & Tutorial in many languages

    -   Presentations & Reading list used for training / marketing &
        open to anyone to add to. Send info to Glenn Gardner at LC.

-   METS Board listserv - by members only. New members not yet on; Nancy
    to ask to have members put on of Glenn Gardner.

-   METS wiki - open to public.

    -   Where draft agendas are for meetings which are now open to the
        public

    -   Used for working drafts; finals then usually go to website

    -   Genesis of both wiki and profile playground. Used some, not a
        lot yet.

    -   Used by web re-design group

-   METS Board wiki - open to Board members only. Brian to add names.

    -   Used for Board business, when becomes a topic needing wider
        discussion, should go to public METS listserv.

    -   Draft documents go here before moving elsewhere including draft
        planning for METS events and METS Primer & Reference Manual.

-   METS listserv open to public.

     

2.  **Admin structure & technical co-chair (Nancy)**

    As Richard could join us for only a little while, began discussion
    of whether / how structure of technical co-chair (along with admin
    co-chair) was effective structure. At the close of the meeting, the
    following was decided:

-   What is needed is a technical schema editor; responsibility for this
    could be done separated from co-chair activities such as
    coordination of events, meetings, etc.

-   Documentation editor needs to be separate from this role as well

-   For now, Rick will be acting as tech co-chair which includes some
    coordination activity and the tech schema editor. That may change in
    the future. He has the discretion to ask for help from a small tech
    group if he wishes.

-   The full Board would still be making the decisions about how to
    implement changes to the schema. If a small group makes
    recommendations, they should still come to the full Board to discuss
    all the options, pros and cons.

-   Rob would be interested in being the schema editor, but not the
    co-chair coordination activities.

-   Rick will keep us apprised of his working status.

    ** **

3.  **Round Robin updates (All)**

-   Tobias: has written a theoretical paper comparing different
    approaches to web archiving. To be discussed later. Not much changed
    in the Kopal profile at the moment, but may be revision soon.

-   Rob: Less with METS at present; more with EAD and continuing with
    datasets.

-   Nancy:

    -   Working with Fedora including dis-aggregation of METS into parts
        that would allow tracking of digital objects via a DO registry.
        How best to do? Are others doing & how? \[others doing similar
        things including Indiana and Brown \]

    -   RAMLET work explained again. Those interested in looking at the
        public dox include Adam, Tobias, Rob & Rick, at least. Forward
        existing public dox to these folks (except Rick who has them.)

    -   Beginning to work with DDI. What\'s the best way to do?
        Mentioned IASSIST training on METS. More to follow at meeting on
        Tuesday.

-   Joachim:

    -   Working on several projects, the 2nd of which will require that
        ccs: work with PREMIS which will be new.

    -   In every project, there are large amounts of data requiring that
        efforts to be made to reduce redundancy and use references, when
        possible.

-   Ingrid:

    -   National Library of Australia continues to use the METS profile
        that they\'ve registered, but are now adapting it to audio
        objects for delivery. Preservation MD is not included in the
        METS dox. There may well be different structural maps for some
        audio objects, e.g., for the Sound Archives of Australia.

-   Brian:

    -   Hasn\'t been working with METS as much as EAD and MARC records
        along with the new Data Consultant, Adrian Turner.

    -   7Train tool has been adapted to include sub-object level
        components as a result of working with the John Muir Project
        (and transformation of a Filemaker Pro database).

    -   CDL has been working with Ex Libris\' digiTool based on their
        METS profile.

    -   There is an investigation beginning in developing technical MD
        for PDFs.

    -   A new datastream is coming from UCLA which is associated with
        their content management system. CDL is working with Steven
        Davidson.

    -   Brian has also beginning to work with Stephen Abrams who is now
        head of the Preservation Repository along with Perry Willett who
        is the newly hired Data Consultant.

-   Richard:

    -   Has begun working with JISC\'s e-framework to develop a profile
        for METS.

    -   Has also submitted some text to the Digital Curation Centre\'s
        registry of MD standards about METS to replace some less than
        accurate existing text.

-   Rick:

    -   Has been working with new projects bringing datastreams destined
        for CDL\'s preservation repository which include EAD\'s.

    -   There are also a couple of new audio projects including a
        project to digitize oral interviews of Supreme Court Justices,
        and the San Francisco City Arts & Lectures interviews.

-   Markus:

    -   In his capacity as technical architect for digitization
        projects, has been working on recordings from the British
        Library\'s Sound Archives. There will be a profile submitted for
        this project (?)

    -   Has also been working with born digital newspaper resources, but
        will not be submitting a profile for this project.

    -   Has been working to establish requirements for developers
        including which tag in METS are used for what purposes, and
        which values from which source should go in the tags.

    -   Markus & Angela Dappert have written an article for the
        September / October issue of D-Lib magazine on the use of PREMIS
        and METS for e-journals, for PREMIS version 1.2, and an earlier
        version of METS. See
        [[http://www.dlib.org/dlib/september08/dappert/09dappert.html]{.underline}](http://www.dlib.org/dlib/september08/dappert/09dappert.html).

-   Robin:

    -   With Andrea Goethels and her team, Robin has been working on the
        specifications for the next generation of the Harvard
        preservation repository. This time, the repository will be based
        on a an object descriptor model rather than a file based. Part
        of the challenge of this effort is to accommodate the variety of
        METS objects already in the repository.

    -   Plans for additional digital resources to add include both open
        access journals, license objects and methodology objects to the
        repository as well.

    -   They plan to have a series of content models, and are looking to
        the EchoDep approach for versioning.

    -   They also plan to add administrative MD and technical MD, and
        are looking possibly to the use of the \<stream\> tag in METS
        for this kind of information.

    -   They plan to include the output from tools such as Jhove, DROID,
        and the New Zealand MD extractor tool, all of which would be
        part of the FITS tool set .

-   Adam:

    -   A main focus for the British Library next year is working with
        datasets. They are thinking of using OAI-ORE for these
        materials. He is looking forward to more discussion at the DDI
        meeting later in the week.

-   Arwen:

    -   UCSD is working with an internal asset management system that
        brings in METS and which is RDF based

    -   UCSD is sending their METS objects also to CDL\'s Digital
        Preservation Repository.

    -   UCSD continues to incorporate a METS export into the
        Archivist\'s Toolkit (AT) with the intention of making both EAD
        and METS output work with the Online Archive of California. The
        tool was originally very EAD oriented, and there is a need to
        make the tool more METS/ individual object oriented. They also
        need to work on plugging AT into other systems.

    -   UCSD also continues to work with the San Diego Supercomputer
        center on various digitization and preservation projects.

-   Jenn:

    -   Along with Rob Wolfe and the PREMIS subgroup, Jenn has been
        working on the creation of best practices for METS in PREMIS.
        She has created a METS profile based on a version of the
        guidelines which is being reviewed by Rebecca Guenther at the
        Library of Congress. The guidelines seem to be in flux, however,
        and may become more prescriptive which would have an impact upon
        the profile as well.

    -   Work continues at Indiana on the METS Navigator by trying to
        modularize it so that it can be better integrated into other
        applications and less of a stand-alone application. They are
        also planning to integrate the tool with XTF. It is not yet
        ready for public release.

    -   Indiana is working on the digitization of historical journals
        and auto-generating METS structmap information from TEI and are
        finding interesting relationship between TEI & METS. It might be
        useful to have a conversation with the TEI community on how METS
        could / should be used with METS.

        -   As part of the investigation too, they are hoping to use
            code to generate technical metadata for some of the files,
            such as PDFs. What technical metadata should be gathered for
            PDFs? Right now, they\'re only keeping the JHOVE output.

    -   EAD issue:

        -   item level linking where description doesn't go down to the
            item level. Trying to replicate experience of pulling things
            out of a box. This is also an area where it would be useful
            to have a conversation with the EAD community on the best
            way to use METS with EAD.

    -   METS for metadata other than structural.

    -   Need for policies, best practices on issues like where to
        declare name spaces.

-   Clay:

    -   Metadata Registry. Commonly used metadata values registered.
        Describe once in a way that can be programmatically reused.
        There will be more discussion about this later in the meeting.

    -   TextMD starting to take off a little bit. There is a need for an
        Editorial Board, so if anyone is interested, let Clay know.

    -   There are new projects beginning to use METS such as the
        digitization of the Performing Arts Encyclopedia.

        -   Descriptive Metadata system.

        -   Looking at native xml database.

        -   Wrapping everything in METS including just bibliographic
            records from the Voyager system.

-   Terry:

    -   Columbia continues to digitize mostly books and journals. They
        are now a Google partner, so are about to be inundated with
        digitized objects. They plan to clean up the Google METS dox for
        preservation.

    -   They are using METS to describe both Real world object and its
        digital version. They are struggling with the issue of how to
        link the analog and digital versions.

    -   Digitization of Arts Collection.

        -   Archives and digitization going in opposite directions.

        -   Whitman collection: attempt to use METS to describe & hold
            together entire collection, but not as a web archive. Then
            hand off to Virginia for incorporation into their
            repository.

    -   There is interest in using METS for biological systematics:
        creating enhanced or scientific package to describe species. May
        also incorporate use of RDF as part of the process.

    -   A theoretical issue of interest to Terry related to METS is the
        inherent laxity of xml description. Too ambiguous. Difficulty in
        saying relationships---especially relationships between IDREFS
        listed IDS. Leverage RDF to clarify some of these relationships.

-   Scott & Marilyn from Harvard:

    -   Open Collections program: Expeditions and Discovery project.

    -   Would like to generate more sophisticated metadata for
        page-turned objects

    -   Would like to incorporate more info about physical attributes of
        materials and record of decisions.

         

4.  **METS Schema documentation and METS Schema Revision Requests
    (Rick)**

-   Documentation alignment.

    -   Rick has made a first pass at aligning schema documentation with
        the METS Primer. In the process of doing this he has sometimes
        revised the schema documentation. There are five main reasons
        for the changes:

        -   To fit the documentation to a more general context in the
            schema. Primer documentation is specific whereas Schema
            documentation sometimes occurs within datatype or attribute
            Group shared by multiple elements.

        -   To make the documentation more concise as suits the schema
            context.

        -   To achieve greater consistency across the documentation for
            attributes having the same name and serving parallel
            functions across the schema. (ID for example)

        -   To correct errors.

        -   To simplify and clarify primer language and syntax.

    -   In the case of the last three categories of changes, the changes
        should generally be made in the primer as well.

    -   A draft 1.8 schema with the aligned documentation and a table of
        of the departures from the orignal Primer text are available at
        <http://www.socialtext.net/p-mets-board/index.cgi?draft_schema_1_8_with_documentation_aligned_with_primer>.

    -   Arwen will work on correcting the Primer as indicated in the
        table of changes prepared by Rick.

-   Correcting use requirements on behavior ID and STRUCTID attributes.

    -   Currently both ID and STRUCTID are required attributes on the
        behavior element. Yet in typical cases only one or the other
        would be required. The ID attribute, but not the STRUCTID
        attribute, would be necessary if the behavior element represents
        a transformFile behavior. In this case the TRANSFORMBEHAVIOR
        attribute on the pertinent transformFile element would reference
        the ID attribute value on the pertinent behavior. But unless
        this behavior also pertained to one or more div\'s in the
        structMap, the STRUCTID attribute would have no meaning here.
        Conversely, if a behavior applies to one or more div\'s in the
        METS structMap, then the STRUCTID element is needed to identify
        the div\'s to which the behavior pertains. But in this case a
        behavior ID attribute would not be necessary. When behaviors
        pertain to the structMap div\'s the direction of the link is
        from behavior to div(s), not vice versa. Because often only one
        or the other attribute would pertain in a given behavior, both
        should be made optional.

    -   Board agreed, pending review by Jerry McDonough that both the
        attributes in question should be made optional. The
        documentation will clarify under what circumstances one or the
        other should be present.

    -   Post Board meeting update: Jerry has reviewed and thinks it's
        fine to make both attributes optional. Rick will make changes to
        version 1.8.

-   Add xlink:extendedLink support to the structLink element.

    -   Currently the METS structLink element only supports one to one
        links between nodes of the mets structMap. British Library has
        encountered a need for extended links\--specifically the ability
        to express a sequential set of links between one structMap node
        and multiple other nodes. To provide for this need in an xlink
        compliant manner, and in a manner that may be generally useful,
        Rick proposed that we add support for extended links to the
        structLink element by means of an smLinkGrp element of type
        xlink:extendedLink.

    -   Jenn and others questioned why BL couldn't accomplish what it
        proposes to accomplish via the proposed additions to structLink
        just using the existing provisions of the structMap. Markus: BL
        wants to keep the logical and physical structMaps separate and
        "pure".

    -   Markus thought that the proposal would in general meet the BL's
        need. However there are still some issues that need to be
        resolved, such as whether the area element has any place within
        the extended links. In general, the relationship between the
        provisions of the proposed structLink/extendedLink and
        provisions of the structMap need clarification.

    -   The draft proposal for extendedLink implementation and sample
        instances are available at: [[CR 1.8 Add xlink:extendedLink
        support to the structLink
        element]{.underline}](http://www.socialtext.net/mim-2006/index.cgi?cr_1_8_add_xlink_extendedlink_support_to_the_structlink_element).

    -   Post Board meeting update: Further discussion of the issues will
        continue on the METS list and possibly through phone
        conferencing with the interested parties. Because of the number
        of issues still to be resolved, any implementation of
        extendedLink will probably be postponed until version 1.9 of the
        schema.

-   Make ID attributes on dmdSec, techMD, rightsMD, sourceMD and
    digiprovMD elements optional.

    -   Rick proposed this change because he had observed examples where
        DMDID and ADMID attributes linked to ID attribute values below
        the elements with the required ID attributes. (LC, for example,
        links from the DMDID to the ID attribute on the \<mods\> element
        below the dmdSec.) He thought that this might have become
        standard practice.

    -   Clay: Trying to get LC to stop its current practice.

    -   Board in general: Best to encourage the standard practice as
        originally intended.

    -   Proposal withdrawn

         

         

5.  **METS Profile Revision (Jenn)**

    Jenn reviewed what the group had been discussing as reported in
    meeting notes previously sent out. Decisions and issues discussed as
    follows:

     

-   Number 1 goal is to make profiles easier to implement.

-   Machine actionable---later.

-   Proposed changes: features from XHTML, attach XML snippets, Document
    model section, use cases section, language a requirement is in can
    be specified.

    -   Clay will look in to importing XHTML import

    -   Brown/Patrick to develop Profile request form

-   Other changes/comments.

    -   Nancy: document model section: does this mean adding only text
        to explain what we meant and some examples or diagrams as well?

    -   Markus\' diagrams would be helpful as well although there would
        be an issue of how to embed within the schema.

    -   If resource format is restricted would that go in the document
        model as well?

    -   Jenn: need for better, fuller documentation.

    -   Jenn: An institution's profile may need to be versioned over
        time, both because local requirements change and because
        software that uses METS changes. Right now, we just create a new
        profile, but do we want something more robust than this?
        Whatever we do will have to allow the older version of the
        profile still to be used.

    -   Simplification may be achieved by the web form more than by
        simplification of the profile itself.

    -   Use cases.

    -   Markus: clarifying when certain sections need to be present.
        Conditional requirements.

    -   Independent section, which could be linked to from the
        requirement.

    -   Do we need to rethink what's required?

        -   Brian & Jenn: flaw in current profile in requiring
            everything.

        -   Terry & Nancy: some value in making explicit whether
            something applies or not.

        -   Bring up at the BOF

        -   Robin: will need to do something to enable consistency of
            expression when a there\'s no requirement to express.

    -   Profile changes over time to correspond to software changes.

        -   New URI:

        -   Brian: currently the case.

        -   Jenn: do we want to continue with current rule or implement
            something more robust.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   New members of METS Profile group: Terry and Joachim

-   Markus: Time frame for new profile & support?

    -   Jenn: A lot of work to fall to Brown. Need to talk with Patrick.

    -   Nancy: target date for specifications would be good idea.

    -   Chair persons availability issues:

        -   Need for a new co-lead as Brian needs to pull out as
            co-lead.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Clay: Historical questions.

    -   Why decision to go with separate schema rather than subset of
        METS schema?

    -   Answer: Problem with things that couldn't be mechanically
        validated, are useful as documentation.

    -   Clay:

        -   New technology: GRDDL. Is this something that would work?

        -   Would use of key/keyRef functionality instead of ID/IDRef
            might help to make profiles more restrictive?

        -   What about defining levels of compliance? This has been
            previously discussed, without resolution.

    ```{=html}
    <!-- -->
    ```
    -   Terry: optional features Appinfo sections within the existing
        schema that could be used toward machine actionability.

        -   Arwen: layering would help meet both of the goals.

        -   Jenn: layering is still a possibility.

    -   Nancy: do we know what we mean by machine actionability?

    -   Brian: Morgan\'s levels of machine actionability based on what
        is important for interoperability

        -   First level is for just validation, and then moving into
            needs for enforcing business rules and policies.

        -   Need to be able to describe something that could be dropped
            in place as a driver for machine actionability such as a
            controlled range of values triggering different application
            actions.

        -   conclusion: need for more discussion of interoperability.

        -   Tobias: concurs. Need step by step approach. Form will give
            more consistency and structure to profiles. Jut this will be
            a good first step towards machine actionability.

    -   Nancy: try to get graduate student to help us define what we
        mean by machine actionability and interoperability. Help come up
        with framework to help address the problems.

        -   Money issue: difficult to come by. Maybe DLF?

        -   Timing. New job description. May be hard to get someone for
            January.

    ```{=html}
    <!-- -->
    ```
    -   Jenn: write up what comes out of BOF and this meeting. May be
        good basis for job description.

    -   Nancy will pursue with Jenn.

         

        ** **

6.  **SKOS (Simple Knowledge Organization System) - (Clay)**

    Standards and Research Data Values Registry.

-   SKOS defined as ISO standard for sharing vocabularies, thesauri.

-   Registry idea:

-   Only for standards impacting LC

-   URI way of expressing concepts.

-   Want to base on web service. Return multiple formats/serializations
    including XML schemes.

-   ConceptScheme: from SKOS. One of three or 4 SKOS concepts.

-   Example of cryptographic concept scheme:

    -   Defines concepts.

    -   SKOS good at internationalization: allows different levels.

    -   Design behind registry: allow conceptSchemes to be abstracted.
        Collection used to draw together pertinent concepts.

    -   Steps:

        -   Define concepts

        -   Add to appropriate conceptscheme, e.g., Controlled
            vocabularies for checksum or fixity algorithms that are used
            in MIX, PREMIS and METS.

-   How would a schema reference something from the SKOS registry list?
    What impact would it have on the METS schema?

-   Adam: Would there be a problem with validation of METS instance
    documents if relying upon an external controlled vocabulary list?

-   Problem with deletions. What if something deleted out from under
    you.

    -   Rob: difficult in rdf.

    -   Clay: LC not going to be in the business of deleting concepts

-   Versioning: URIs assigned to changes. Can be propagated, perhaps to
    a preceding change set such as has been explored by the Talis Co.

-   Not clear how we would collaboratively create lists of values that
    can be validated; what would be the rules for \"authorship\" of a
    concept, especially among lists shared by several schemas (METS,
    MIX, PREMIS)

-   Difference between concept scheme and collection.

-   Discussion:

    -   Need to see what it looks like in a schema.

    -   Adam: maintenance issue. Need to be sure that it will be kept up
        to date.

    -   Adam: seeing how few values would affect us, manual update might
        be most effective. Do we need automated mechanism or not? Or
        just agree to keep in synch.

    -   Could we use appInfo mechanism within METS schema to import and
        validate the controlled vocabularies?

-   Action item. Rick & Clay & Rob

    -   Draw up a list of values that we might want to put under control

    -   Example of what it would look like in schema if we decided to
        use registry. (may be multiple ways)

    -   Get together list of policy issues.

         

7.  **METS Website and documentation (Rick)**

    -   Live examples page.

        -   Not complete

        -   Needs more examples

        -   Clay will take over from Morgan

        -   Jenn will provide more more examples. Other board invited as
            well.

        -   Timeframe: Dec 1. For examples from Jenn.

        -   Rick will find email to Morgan on cases where an OAC
            presentation of a UCB example is available in addition to
            the UCB (GenView) presentation.

    -   Cookbook for schema changes. Robin needs to have point
        conversations with various people to complete the draft she has
        in progress.

         

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
8.  **OAI-ORE specifications (Nancy)**

    -   We hope to meet with Tim Cole and Tom Habing later this week to
        find out more about the work that UIUC staff are doing to
        explore the ways that METS could be used with ORE

    -   With final version of the specification, it\'s clear that there
        will be multiple serializations will available one of which
        might be METS

    -   What would be accomplished:

        -   Allow you to dig down into a METS document.

        -   Others?

    -   Rob:

        -   Problem is getting from directed graph into a tree
            structure---since ORE is directed graph.

        -   Adam: not sure what problem is.

    -   Nancy: is METS serialization of OAI-ORE something that we want
        to pursue and collaborate upon?

    -   Those wishing to know more about this topic at the meeting this
        week, if possible include Rob, Adam, Terry, Markus, Rick,
        Joachim, Brian, Robin, Clay, Jenn and Nancy

         

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
9.  **METS and web-archiving (Tobias)**

    -   An Article and presentation done for the IPRES 2008 meeting at
        the British Library described the following:

        -   Question is: how could results of harvester be put into
            preservation system in a format based on METS. 2 options
            were discussed:

            -   Maintain technical md on each file harvested

            -   Maintain technical md just at the arc/warc file level
                which is the simpler approach

        -   Issue: preserving accessibility. Solution depends on what
            you want to do

        -   Migration: need technical info about each file

        -   Emulation: arc/warc level is adequate.

        -   Issue: if you have warc do you need METS? Already container
            has a lot of the information that would be stored in the
            METS file. What does METS as container contribute?

        -   If you have one system for everything-then consistency in
            outer wrapper may be important/useful

            -   May mean some replication of information.

        -   The German National Archive has not yet decided which way to
            go. May use METS or separate web harvesting results from
            other results.

        -   Robin: Harvard is about in the same place. Wrapping in METS.
            May some day attempt to extract technical md.

        -   Tobias: would be great if JHOVE could be done at the point
            of the crawl.

        -   Robin: Arc rewritten at some point. That would be point for
            adding technical metadata.

        -   Brian: CDL is getting WARC files of an entire crawl along
            with Lucene indexes using NutHatch, and then wrapping in
            METS. They are also using Jhove at some point in the
            process. This process would be difficult to do though on a
            production schedule.

        -   Need for JHOVE module for warc.

        -   Adam: WARC not different from other container formats. all
            have some problem of multiple byte streams that may have
            separate technical metadata. Collecting at time of crawl
            makes sense because then it can be added into warc file as
            its created.

        -   Question: is there some action needed by METS board to
            establish best practice about using harvesting results
            within METS?

            -   Adam: best addressed by individual institutions publicly
                documenting what their doing and why.

            -   Robin: get the models out there.

            -   Tobias: Worlds coming together: crawling and
                preservation activities are coming together.

        -   Nancy: put notice out to METS list referring them to Tobias
            paper

            -   Check to see if there's anything on website. Try to get
                examples that can be put on the METS website.

        -   Adam: Place on METS website for noting papers about certain
            technical topics?

            -   Yes, Reading List page off top METS page but may not be
                anything on web archiving.

            -   Action: Tobias will send Nancy references to
                presentations and possibly papers. Nancy will send to
                Glenn.

            -   Action: Brian will put archiving examples on wiki
                including those from Eric (?). Gather on wiki then move
                to website.

                ** **

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
9.  **Next meeting & 2009 events**

-   Next DLF will probably not be in Europe. However DLF board meeting
    in Alexandria. Nancy is checking in with Alexandria reps to see if
    there's any interest in hosting a METS Editorial Board meeting.

    -   Meet in Europe?

    -   Issues: Tight budgets may preclude our getting there.

    -   Adam: may be better to shoot for Hague in Fall.

    -   Arwen: easier to get funding in Fall: early in fiscal year.

-   Other events in 2009:

-   Any training events?

    -   Right focus for training?

    -   Adam: constellation of metadata standards may be better focus.
        Bringing together METS, other standards and content model
        together. Approach as content model issue.

    -   Jenn: partnership possibilties: PREMIS and MODS.

    -   Terry: Focus on specific functionality?

         

10. Review of Active Tasks.

-   Need someone to add METS related articles to METS Reading List on
    METS website. Arwen will do.

-   Need more people on Profile Registration List

    -   Rob

    -   Arwen

-   Technical co-chair, schema editor issue

    -   Rob: just one editor.

    -   Nancy: smaller group to work with editor and take on new
        technologies and relationships issue? Present issues, possible
        solutions, pros & cons.

    -   Robin: Rather spin off new technologies ad hoc as they arise.

    -   Adam: Technical editor role necessary.

        -   Technical sub-committee: depends on how many issues there
            are. Also different people may have better technical skills.

        -   Just call role the Technical Editor?

    -   Need for both schema and documentation editors.

    -   Decision: technical editor who would put together proposals for
        xml implementation in consultation with other technical persons.
        \-- Rick for now

    -   Decision: new technologies ad hoc groups depending upon
        interest; will need to find person for each to take charge of
        moving the issue forward.

-   Documentation editor.

    -   Initial primer update: Arwen will take on

    -   Arwen will be ongoing Documentation maintenance person.

    -   Includes getting new presentations/articles on website.

-   Need for separate website maintenance person. \-- no one at the
    moment.

-   Meeting schedule:

    -   Conference calls: 8 PST still OK every 6 - 7

    -   Nancy will send out proposed list

-   Other issues:

-   Jenn: Fundamental schema revisions in external schemas that may be
    of interest to METS and represent direction we'd like to take METS.

-   Drop CHECKSUMENCODING request per Adam

-   Action: Board members are to correct and change active tasks
    pertaining to them.