* Sarah Hutton, though she will send updates on portability work done thus far
ACTION: We need to develop roadmap to get the portability standard, how it works.
ACTION: We need to start implementing some of the proposed Maintenance WG work that have been discussed in the last six months such as picking a specific project like a manifest file and track how can it be used track metadata and some changes that need to be made for its efficiency usage.
Question: (from Sarah), which will be helpful in the DAPSI research:
* Will there be two separate groups working on (1) OKH standard refinement/versioning/adoption and (2) portability of the OKH standard? Or, will it be one single group working on both? Who will the members of the group or groups be?
- General consensus, making the current standard more usable is priority than following through with portability which consists of 90% tooling 10% specification. The current work group will focus on standard adoption and refinement, based on feedback portability can then be tackled.
- Members have not been selected yet though current maintenance WG will be working on this.
There two main options of change of requests currently:
1. Conducting Minor tweaks on the current version (OKH V1)
Current work done on this: conversations about wordings have been held and possible change of proposals initiated.
2. Major revisions of the current versions
How do we proceed with fundamental restructuring of the OKH standard. This includes compiling suggested changes that can be transformed into a V2.0, then small changes within it can be made or altered in due course that do not make it to the final V2.0.
Holding standard documentation conversations
Conversations need to be documented separate from current maintenance WG meetings. Do we start a thread on the forum to open conversation? JSON vs ODF: Manifest format. Slicing current metadata, what goes into that
Core functionality ( How do the OK standards (OKH and OKW) frameworks talk to each other )
- Can a maker using the OKH standard to upload a product have the ability to use the OKW framework as well.
- Repair and Maintenance about the OKH standard - OKH (not discussed yet)
- Helpful Engineering working on tooling: extra information or fields needed about the OKH standard - list of processes, tools, CAT files, etc
- https://github.com/helpfulengineering/template-project/ proposed way of work done by helpful engineering, presenting the standard as a directory structure. project folder standard instead of Metadata standard structure is the current approach by helpful engineering.
- Manifest files: Consideration of Dokan : Dokan software required to read the manifest.
Are we looking at increasing the scope as the maintenance WG? - to develop tools and standards in parallel
- Nathan - we have to develop them concurrently, including;
Metadata: Defining the metadata and how it can used. Do we call it an API or Protocol or combination of both?
We need Pathways for testing. describing metadata, its usage and testing. We may need five working groups.