Conversation
|
Consider coloring the spec to highlight elements of HAPI metadata required for FAIR |
|
clarify "it" in license description - add example (0BSD) |
|
need to clarify that if a list of licenses is provided, then there is an implied "OR" between them, i.e., any of the licenses can be used |
|
If we do encounter people wanting to use compound licenses (which care supported by SPDX, but not through URLs), then we need to adjust the Since multi-licensing of data seems unlikely, we don't need to support this now. |
|
Possible wording: Optional A URL or array of URLs to a license landing page. If license is in the spdx.org list, the URL should link to the SPDX license landing page, as in [0BSD example]. If the license is not in the SPDX list, then the actual license content can be provided in the string. |
|
For provenance, we don't have any good examples in Heliophysics on which to base a complex entry. So for now, we will include a We are intrigued by the ability to have a formalized provenance representation, such as the one at DataCite: https://support.datacite.org/docs/tracking-provenance But for now, since we don't; have use cases to base it on, and in the interest of getting HAPI 3.0 out the door, we will just have the free text option for now, since that gets us most of what is needed - just a way to describe where the data came from. HAPI will also soon support linkages between datasets, and we intend to include a provenance linkage that could list files (and maybe also include the |
|
Once we add more detailed provenance (through linkages) we need to edit the FAIR content to mention the richer set of options: "You can also express provenance through the linkages mechanism, which allows listing of individual files associated with a specific time range request..." This is relevant for the issue to add a files endpoint: |
|
I read this over and it looks good to go. There are two minor typos:
|
No description provided.