Member Node Wranglers  - please note time change to half-past the hour
    Fridays at 10:30 am Alaska
                    11:30 am Pacific
                    12:30 noon Mountain
                    1:30 pm Central
                    2:30 pm Eastern

Please note new GTM info, also:
1 August 2014
                                                                  
Attending:  Laura, John Cobb, Amber, Rebecca, Bruce, Dave, Mark

Regrets:  


Agenda: 

NOTE:  New meeting time at least through the end of July - 2:30p Eastern

        1. High profile issues (or current items of interest
        
        FOLLOW-UP -- DUG activities/outcomes:

        1.5   Current MNs
                 Dryad listObjects issue, see https://redmine.dataone.org/issues/6010 
                   Robert queried a particular date range but results returned records out of bounds; Robert has talked with Ryan and he is aware of the issue and will address next week; potential for impact in synchronization if dates are being interpreted incorrectly (doesn't look like a time zone issue - conversation with BEW and LM yesterday)
                   
                   LTER on schedule to transition from metacat instance to GMN tomorrow; name/nodeID will not change but will update description; LTER would like to deprecate current metacat content but that may change... content moving forward on the GMN - some is identical to current data, some is new; all new identifiers (even content that is the same in new as in old)
                
        2. Status of upcoming MNs
     
    Future
        3. Old action items
              MN Documentation - MN Deployment and MN Ongoing Operations - Laura to do  this -- working on identifying needs and best methods to address those needs, including ask.dataone.org, documentation in mule1 or on dataone.org, etc.

             
        4. Not-high profile issues
            (Was under Current MNs related to SANParks, CDL, etc.)
            LT  to address Memorandum of Understanding (re: operations and service expectations) between DataONE and MNs
            suggestion: compile a list of common hangups from both perspectives - these might be good points to include in the MOU, such as:
       
        5. Around the room
        Amber - Laura/Amber talked this week about the process near the end of implementation, timing issues, when a MN appears as an upcoming MN on the dashboard, defining the MN "name" - pull from the NodeDocument?? 
            more talk about the dashboard - wonky things happening 7/31 and 8/1 - different protocols (http vs https) and different browsers saw different results; Dave and others are/have been investigating (right NOW, FF and Chrome return results immediately (at UTK) and IE croaks) - this is not something that DataONE can "fix"
        
        Dublin Core conversation - there was some discussion at a developers meeting last week about using DC (specifically for MPC and in general); concern that use of DC is not the way we want to go, but there are many potential MNs who use/can use DC, so there is a (potentially) greater demand for DC; 
            one option is to have a more generic method of identifying and pulling DC fields from a given container (EML, FGDC, OAI-PMH, etc.)
            there isn't a specific DC container (so we could put DC fields in a file labeled "metadata" and we would pull from there for indexing)
            what if you have multiple title fields?  pick one (consistently)
            
        Rebecca - question for Mark (done)
        John - nothing
        Mark - nothing MN related today
        Dave - nothing else today

        


Tickler (things to revisit periodically)

Purpose of MN Description Document (past and future) 
    Intent is to describe the (potential) MN, identify the types/quantity/formats of data they hold, - perhaps we need a  "friendlier" format, perhaps an interview process;
    Workflow: should this information (MNDD) be collected at the beginning of the process, or is the way we've been doing it lately (after the fact) a new way of doing business??  Also consider if  this information gathering (form or interview) is the best use of resources for those potential MNs who may or may not become a MN if implemented as a first step.  Possibly change the workflow? Is a pdf the best way to view the information?
    Next steps:  Laura to come up with alternative(s) to current MNDD - content is good, but format/mechanism needs some work.  
    Another thing: Laura and Amber to look at workflow for last stages of implementation, test with EDAC  too late for that, need to pick another one.
    Also -- how does the MN DD relate to: 
                    the node document:  https://cn.dataone.org/cn/v1/node  - developers have/create this information (node registration, see updateNodeCapabilities)
                    and redmine??    <--- work with redmine as mostly-authoritative source
    Could a spreadsheet be a viable solution?  Maybe.  A database would work.  In any case, some information is appropriately "private" -  how  would we handle that?
                

Revisit the default "only results with data" checkbox to unchecked; plan is to move the   checkbox from search page to results page but remain checked by default, initial draft in development environment.
               
Bob's feedback about the dashboard - he suggested a count of MNs on the dashboard (MNs, RNs), probably/maybe an easy thing to do a count of MNs and RNs and display