Here is the document on which we based this summary

Also, I'm searching for a page or image that shows the relations between modules.

I've sent an email (@ardumont in CC) to Bruno and Yannick about this error and about T2611.

id  |        reception_date         | complete_date | external_id  | swh_id | status  | client_id | collection_id | parent_id | status_detail | swh_id_context | check_task_id | load_task_id
-----+-------------------------------+---------------+--------------+--------+---------+-----------+---------------+-----------+---------------+----------------+---------------+--------------
 902 | 2020-09-17 13:16:42.70178+00  |               | hal-02942052 |        | partial |         2 |             1 |           |               |                |               |
 903 | 2020-09-17 14:17:59.276928+00 |               | hal-02942052 |        | partial |         2 |             1 |           |               |                |               |

Which means the deposit is not completed before the Application error.

I have tested today at 11.20 with the same error on HAL's platform.
@ardumont : can you check what the logs say about that?
I think it's about the client credentials, they use the HAL prod credentials and they are listed as HAL preprod client.

The idea was to update the information about the slug on the documentation we give to clients :

1. https://docs.softwareheritage.org/devel/swh-deposit/getting-started.html#single-deposit
2. https://docs.softwareheritage.org/devel/swh-deposit/spec-api.html#create-deposit

I think we can resolve this task as we agreed on staying with the xml format for the metadata-only deposit.

@vlorentz can I assign you this task, as you are working on specs and docs?
it's only about adding information on the new SWHID qualifiers.

Great ! thanks for tackling this !

Adding this link to the case study:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1EZIBvENaY-atx9PvoOKUb9setQTERV2rmLvpMrJd2e0/edit?usp=sharing

I prefer A2 as well.

I see we have three-four options:

@vlorentz can you please review the naming and the choice of the tag with or without the attribute (e.g id, url)?

In T2312#47921, @moranegg wrote:

After this morning's meeting with @vlorentz and @ardumont:
We will keep the metadata-only deposit specs with the idea of a separate namespace swh for which we need to write the schema (not sure we have that).

This way, the xml with metadata has a section where the identified artifact is mentioned:

Reference a snapshot, revision or release:

With ${type} in {snp (snapshot), rev (revision), rel (release) }:
<swh:deposit>
  <swh:reference>
    <swh:object id="swh:1:${type}:aaaaaaaaaaaaaa..."/>
  </swh:reference>
</swh:deposit>

We need to add to the list of types: directory and content

The possibility to deposit metadata on an origin should be implemented as well, but is not suited for institutional repositories (e.g HAL).
Reference an origin:

<swh:deposit>
  <swh:reference>
    <swh:origin url="https://github.com/user/repo"/>
  </swh:reference>
</swh:deposit>

This specs fits the POST of a new deposit in SWORD and is described in the SWORD v2 documentation (6.3.3. Creating a Resource with an Atom Entry)

After this morning's meeting with @vlorentz and @ardumont:
We will keep the metadata-only deposit specs with the idea of a separate namespace swh for which we need to write the schema (not sure we have that).

It's linking to a blog post, it's not even the formal documentation..
There is also the notion of persistence.

So should we have a redirection to the SWHID docs on https://softwareheritage.org/swhid or use the current link?

The resolver for SWHIDs can be https://archive.softwareheritage.org/ so should it be the value of PropertyID or the one you have written: https://softwareheritage.org/swhid?
The same is with HAL: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ adding the HAL-ID to the end resolves the identifier.
So is that correct?

{
...
"identifier": [
	{
	  "@type": "PropertyValue",
	  "propertyID": "https://archive.softwareheritage.org/",
	  "value": "swh:1:dir:9f85c8f51850028a9fbc03463c74de29a2d24c6c"
	},
    {
	  "@type": "PropertyValue",
	  "propertyID": "https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/",
	  "value": "hal-02071874"
    }        
],
...
}

or

{
...
"identifier": [
	{
	  "@type": "PropertyValue",
	  "propertyID": "https://archive.softwareheritage.org/SWHID",
	  "value": "swh:1:dir:9f85c8f51850028a9fbc03463c74de29a2d24c6c"
	},
    {
	  "@type": "PropertyValue",
	  "propertyID": "https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/HAL-ID",
	  "value": "hal-02071874"
    }        
],
...
}

After a talk with Bruno and Yannick on HAL, they say that depositing metadata is: 6.5.2. Replacing the Metadata of a Resource
because the resource already exists on SWH and this should be a PUT of new (maybe new from scratch) metadata on an existing identifier (SWHID).

DublinCore hasn't enough properties to answer our software properties requirements.

@vlorentz :

serialization format: @type is missing

List of comments from this collaborative document: https://hackmd.io/g_6J8cBETBi66R9AvPAGOA

now that the metadata is going to be in a separated metadata storage, there is the question of keeping the revision artifact.

@vlorentz can we say that by using both CodeMeta and schema.org namespaces, we can use the roles in the metadata of a deposit?

The referencePublication property is available on the HAL preprod platform (waiting for deployment).
Also, IPOL is using the referencePublication property on the deposits to SWH.

https://hackmd.io/YIJXcf3YTDiwwYGD-yePrA

Here is the pad shared with the InvenioRDM team:
https://hackmd.io/YIJXcf3YTDiwwYGD-yePrA

We need to review this task with the current workflows.

I put it in high, since the Web-App UI is ready for a direct access using the search box in the landing page of the main website.

@anlambert I already saw a lot of improvements in the last few days/weeks and it looks great !
Can you ping me when you complete all UX/UI tasks so I can review the changes with the set of questions above?

Discussion with the WikiDigi WG was captured here in 2018: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1EZIBvENaY-atx9PvoOKUb9setQTERV2rmLvpMrJd2e0/edit?usp=sharing