The following notes were taken by R. Joyner. Corrections are welcome. IN PROGRESS
Planetary Data System Standards Teleconference
4 April 2007 9-10 AM
Announcements:
None
1. Report the Node votes on the following re-written SCRs and discuss if there is interest (All)
- SCR 3-1083.v3: Increase length of SOURCE_PRODUCT_ID keyword
- R.Joyner indicated that the SCR passed with vote to send directly to implementation
- SCR was sent to J.Ho for implementation
- SCR 3-1104.v3: Increase the length of START_TIME & STOP_TIME keywords (A.Raugh)
- R.Joyner indicated that version 2 did not pass; got a new version from A.Raugh
- A.Raugh indicated that this version restricts the length of the keywords to 30 chars (which will allow nanasecond precision)
- R.Joyner indicated that he received some votes by email but not enough for a quorum
- A.Raugh indicated that the 30 chars are required to accommodate the optional Z character
- R.Simpson asked if our international partners are in agreement with the SCR
- S.Hughes took the action to email J.Zender to ensure he is aware of the SCR and the potential changes to be implemented in the SCR
- A.Raugh was concerned that this was setting a precedent. She wants a policy that stipulates the actions required.
- M.Gordon suggested that the IPDA WG should address this policy; how and under what circumstances do we address notifiying the international community of PDS Standards changes
- R.Joyner confirmed that J.Zender is on the email tech list.
- A.Raugh suggested that EN purchase the 8601 MilStd and have copies on the shelf for reference
- S.Hughes took the action item to purchase the 8601 MilStd
- The SCR was approved by the Tech Session for MC vote.
- SCR 3-1089.v1: Add Sub-objects to FILE object in PSDD
SCR 3-1108.v1: Remove ARCHIVE_STATUS keyword from DATA_SET_INFORMATION object (A.Raugh)
- M.Gordon indicated that this was a serious item
- R.Joyner asked who would like to be on the WG:
T.King suggested that the group explicitely list every potential object applicable to the FILE object
- R.Joyner (lead); C.Neese; S.Hughes; P.Ramirez; L.Huber
- M.Gordon indicated that this SCR is holding up the release of VTOOL and the MC does not want to hold up the release date (as the tool is in demand internationally).
- L.Huber suggested that the SCR only need list the optional objects appropriate for the FILE object. L.Huber indicated that he listed the objects in the BLOG.
- T.King indicated that at this point it is not important to list the elements
- S.Hiughes indicated that the tool is working correctly; it is a problem in the data dictionary (as the tool is data driven)
- T.King indicated that the explicit FILE object is being used more frequently
- R.Simpson indicated that for MEX, the explicit FILE object is required
- R.Joyner took the action item to write a DRAFT version of the SCR and distribute to the WG
- R.Joyner indicated that this SCR came from withdrawing SCR 3-1073 (which was passed off to the Tracking Requirements WG).
- R.Simpson indicated that he has a few editorial comments.
- A.Raugh indicated that she if she gets the comments, she could rewrite the SCR and resubmit for an e-vote
- ALL took the action item to post comments to the BLOG
- R.Simpson indicated that the priority is somewhat inconsistent
- R.Joyner will post the new version and will notify the Tech group and ask for an e-vote
- SCR 3-1109.v1: Correct DATA_SET_HOUSEKEEPING object (A.Raugh)
- R.Joyner indicated that this SCR came from withdrawing SCR 3-1073 (which was passed off to the Tracking Requirements WG).
- R.Joyner indicated the HOUSEKEEPING object was created strictly for use by EN (i.e., users external to the EN should never have known about this object).
- S.Hughes suggested that E.Law assist in solving the problem with ingesting this template into the database
- A.Raugh asked if she should (or should not) provide DATA_SET_HOUSEKEEPING objects as part of her submittal to the EN. She indicated that she doesn't mind doing it. She indicated that it is not an unreasonable request.
- Discussion of binning Standards list into categories
- R.Joyner indicated that he was told that the list is to be binned into 2 separate lists; PDS3 and PDS4
- A.Raugh indicated that it makes sense to categorize the list into Standards and Software
- R.Joyner indicated that a potential solution is to simply change the SCR ID from 3-xxxx to 4-xxxx for those SCRs categorized as PDS4
- L.Huber suggested changing the whole number and restart the PDS4 numbering
- S.Hughes suggested that irrespective of numbering, it should continue to be a single database
- M.Gordon suggested that we have the capability to sort the Standards list by 4 categories -- PDS3, PDS4, Standards and Software
- T.King asked what is the process for submitting a new requirement to the system requirements.
- R.Joyner indicated that a software SCR, that requests a new capability, should include a requirements statement.
- S.Hughes indicated that there is a WG that is currently addressing the requirements process and this issue falls under their purvue.
- R.Joyner asked the group if the Standards web pages were redesigned to allow for sorting into 4 ways (Standards or Software) and then further sorted into PDS3 and PDS4
- M.Gordon suggested that the web pages should be simplified to remove some of the less-frequently used links
- R.Simpson indicated that you still need New Issues -- as this is the way to enter new SCRs
- M.Gordon suggested that since there are only a handful of Enhancements, group them into a single PDS3/4 category with a single link
- The group agreed on the following design for the web page:
- New Issues
- All Standards
- All Software
- All Interface
- PDS3 Standards
- PDS4 Standards
- S.Hughes indicated that once the group decides on the categories, then it becomes the responsibility of the EN to implement. S.Hughes asked the group if this is a trivial task, then does the EN have to ask the MC for permission.
- M.Gordon suggested that if the task requires less than 1 week, then they are happy to turn it over to EN for implementation
- Discussion on the "withdraw" SCRs (T.King / A.Raugh list)
- M.Gordon suggested that R.Joyner create an XLS spreadsheet with the following data:
- the SCR #
- the possible dispositions (withdraw, PDS3, PDS4, ...)
- M.Gordon suggested listing the SCRs and the disposition options so that they will have to look it up
- R.Joyner took the action item to create the spreadsheet
2. Next telecon
- The group agreed that the next telecon should be in two weeks (20070418).
Agenda for next telecon (20070418):
1. TBD