Versions Compared

Old Version 3

changes.mady.by.user Ellen Ramsey

Saved on

compared with

New Version 4

changes.mady.by.user Ellen Ramsey

Saved on

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

Goals

  • resync expectations about initial collections to be migrated (previous conversation was in Oct 2023 prior to censhare contract approval in Feb 2024)

Discussion items

ItemWhoNotes

Which collection(s)?

DPG

Avalon

Communications

Ellen
  • DPG is the most complex case, strong motivation to do it first since it should be inclusive of other types of content.
  • Migration of future repositories/content would require licensing of Avyre's migration tool to ULib for us to independently migrate collections. would want to compare cost of Avyre migrating v. ULib using Avyre's licensed tool to migrate. 
Structure of phasesEllen/Ken

Phase 1:

1a. Activation/implementation of censhare

1b. Migration of initial content

Formal QA and approvals of metadata migrated/high-end user acceptance testingKen

Would UVA write our own test cases for approval of completed work? Yes. We have SMEs who would approve migrated content.

Different types of admins and users?Ken
  1. Super Admin: DAM Administrator
  2. Admin: Repository/collection owner
  3. Users: could be segmented by level of access (UVA library patrons v public)
Where does content and metadata live?Ken

Master assets live in censhare and delivered via Virgo. Metadata lives in censhare on the asset, too.

If master asset (e.g. TIFF) lives in censhare, where does derivative that is delivered via Virgo get generated? TBD by stakeholders on DAMI Project Team.

...