2019.09.03 Editors Meeting

Call-in

(* indicates the notetaker)

Review action items from last meeting
- Andrew H. to extract out the "MUST"s from spec into validation rules -- no progress
- Julian: ask Stanford if we can review the agenda for preservation API event -- need to provide attendees with information soon... Julian to follow up with Tom
- Julian: consider what a guidance document of the OCFL stack (on the wiki) would look like -- still to do
Locking and filesystems/cloud
- Discussion on #ocfl slack about differences in requirements for locking/conflict-avoidance between posix filesystems (fairly well understood) and cloud stores (not clear)
- Would like to discuss this at the next community meeting
Encrypted OCFL objects - Simeon
- Is there really need to encrypt beyond local filesystem or S3 encryption setting?
- DPN wanted to do bitstream encryption but it got nowhere
- Julian notes that Backblaze as a bucket provider then they provide key and it is customer responsibility to manage that
- No desire for bitstream level encryption at Stanford or Emory, using storage level encryption instead
Issues
- https://github.com/OCFL/spec/issues/365 -- the term RFC is really confusing and the proposed scheme conflicts with IETF RFCs, agreement that we should have some other term

Do the previous actions!

Andrew H. to extract out the "MUST"s from spec into validation rules
Julian: ask Stanford if we can review the agenda for preservation API event
Julian: consider what a guidance document of the OCFL stack (on the wiki) would look like