[eml-dev] EML use, and associatedParty

[Terry Brown]

Hi,

[please forward this as necessary]

I'm Terry Brown, a researcher at U of MN.  My department recently 
headed up a metadata / data collection and archiving exercise for 
five $6M EPA STAR projects, each collecting diverse coastal data 
sets.  http://eagle.nrri.umn.edu/ gives some background, but the 
short story is that we picked EML to describe and document the 
data sets, which covered the gamut from genomics lab. results through 
water sampling and fish netting to remote sensing analysis.

We put together an entirely server side web based EML editor, and 
also developed a data flow for the EPA's Exchange Network 
(http://www.exchangenetwork.net/) which allows transfer of EML+data 
to the EPA via their CDX protocol.

Working with EML and training biologists to work with EML has been 
an interesting process, and we've been meaning to collect our
thoughts on some of the issues we've encountered and talk with you 
about them.  We haven't done this yet, but I wanted to give you an 
idea about the scope of our work with EML before diving into 
specifics.  Would you be interested in such a discussion when we've 
cataloged out thoughts?

That said, the specific that I'm wondering if you have any guidance 
on at the moment is to do with associatedParty.  Our system 
currently has 218 EML files (spread amongst the 5 major projects, 
describing various subprojects in each).  The same individual occurs 
both in primary roles such as creator, metadataProvider, and 
associatedParty type roles, this happens a lot.

I understand why metadataProvider can't cross reference 
associatedParty... the trouble is I'm not really sure I believe 
associatedParty can cross reference metadataProvider, either.

Our system expands cross references during export, and its current 
behavior is to replace any element that has a non-empty reference 
sub-element with the element to which the xref points.  When you try 
and do this for an associatedParty pointing to a metadataProvider, 
the role is lost.  Actually the system also issues warnings about 
cross references between dissimilar entities and a cross reference 
shadowing data (the role).

This issue wouldn't arise if associatedParty was a more generic 
element that had a role element and a responsibleParty element as 
members, rather than being a descendant of responsibleParty.

Perhaps, as is so often the case, I've answered my own question by 
trying to spell it out.  I've been thanking of an associatedParty as

A choice of (
    A sequence of (
        [contact info.]
        [role]
    )
OR
    [reference]
)

but should I be thinking of it as:

A sequence of (
    A choice of (
        [contact info.]
        OR
        [reference]
    )
    [role]
)

then at least it would make sense that an xref from associatedParty 
to metadataProvider replace only the responsibleParty part and 
retain the role... but it still leaves an inconsistency when there's 
an xref from one associatedParty to another... which role wins?

I'd be interested in any thoughts you have on this case and whether 
or not you know of any similar cases elsewhere in the system?

Thank you,

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Terry Brown               Natural Resources Research Institute
Research Associate        5013 Miller Trunk Highway
tbrown at nrri.umn.edu       University of Minnesota, Duluth
Ph. 218 720 4345          Duluth, Minnesota 55811
Fax 218 720 4328          http://beaver.nrri.umn.edu/~tbrown/