[Esip-preserve] [FOO] Alice publishes a paper, and more data arrives

[Curt Tilmes]

[I'm trying to keep this as simple as I can, but I realize it is
getting complicated.  Please bear with me.  This will help drive our
use cases and illustrate the issues.  We can experiment with this
pretend system on paper much easier than we'll be able to experiment
with our real-world cases.]


Alice compares the FOO collection 1 Level 3 data to the collection 3
data and publishes a paper.

She cites the data, including two references, the two DOIs to the
level 3 data:

doi:10.9999/US/FOOL3.v1 and doi:10.9999/US/FOOL3.v2

The publisher assigns her paper its own DOI:
doi:10.8888/1


After that, 2 more months of L0 data come in and get added to the
database:

FOOL0.13.76e9b680-2d06-4a55-ad2c-79b533ce86ca
FOOL0.14.f6bf9378-4215-41b5-9d3e-96dc0c2e7eeb

They also run the L1B and L2 data in collection 2 (they don't even
bother extending collection 1, since it used the old, obsolete
calibration.)

They produce these 4 new granules:

FOOL1B.v2.13.e36a5d4d-1687-4947-bca8-2312c5f6eb8f
FOOL1B.v2.14.eefa4113-200c-4a97-b5c6-3bd4b695cbc5

FOOL2.v2.13.f8f9564d-cc2a-4760-b1bc-13f1ef5cbdcb
FOOL2.v2.14.4814ed46-0e41-4e3f-8f73-33d0cd2ef0bc


Not only that, the team discovers that the L0 data from
month 10 were corrupt and they obtain corrected data, replacing

FOOL0.10.0b337185-82af-4662-89b0-419bfd3e5db7

file with a corrected file:

FOOL0.10.3adf6dea-06af-478f-8216-2bbcdb0caad2

They also re-run that granule through L1B,L2, and L3,
replacing these files:

FOOL1B.v2.10.2f269e5e-cce7-41e4-8a83-baad1e087c8e
FOOL2.v2.10.533b2a95-d57f-4f75-9b7d-914d3d220310
FOOL3.v2.01.07aa9ae3-9c3e-4508-b027-890dae11b768

with these new ones:

FOOL1B.v2.10.b8f1e287-2d92-4340-9a71-5da5af191f3b
FOOL2.v2.10.6e58a410-60e7-4956-aeaf-37f76a16b171
FOOL3.v2.01.2a365058-fb52-4559-ab4b-085cb5ac0b73


Now, the official archive is distributing the new files, but we've
still got a paper out there that was developed using the old, bad
data.  Note that using simply the DOI for the collection as a whole is
not sufficient to indicate that fact.

Curt