Date
Attendees
Goals
Terminology, spec transition plan
Discussion items
Item | Who | Notes |
---|---|---|
Announcements | j: reminder that I'll be making changes to the zoom URL and calendar invitations approaching my last day at CDL (June 29); anyone have zoom link to contribute? r: the National Herbarium has completed digitization of all 5 million specimens; done along the same lines as other SI ARKs | |
Calls for papers, submission deadlines, upcoming meetings: Calendar of events | ||
Any news items we should blog about? | r: SI is generating ARKs in distinct units with a variety of policies that could be described in a blog post; will come back to the outreach group when we have drafted something | |
New terminology: saying "an organization or assignment stream that has a NAAN" is a bit long and, for outsiders, a bit technical way to refer to an entity that has the ability to create ARKs. Consider adopting this approximation/shorthand to help connect better with users and without having to first teach them what "NAAN" means: "an ARK organization".
| m: seems fine in principle; could be confusing; ok with trialing it | |
Quickstart guide is live on the website
| r: ACTION I'll talk to our Wordpress people about how to improve prominence of this page | |
| j: much IIIF experience at SI? | |
We've blogged about the upcoming change in the recommended form of newly published ARKs (starting on STARTDATE) – from ark:/12345 (oldform) to ark:12345 (newform)
| rf: confused about CUTOVERDATES; does this mean we have to start normalizing to newform ARKs? do we leave old ARKs in oldform in our system? jk: nothing is intended to tell implementers about changing or normalizing internal representation of ARKs (eg, oldform or newform); we should make this clear and find language that is clear and minimizes stress rf: could we put out some use cases so that people can see what this change means in the real world? mg: yes, what are the implications for (a) our dev team and (b) our users; mg: also, is it up to the ARKA to decide? or do we need a focus group? rf: I like the idea of a focus group because it engages people and helps keep the community alive, but I have no energy for it jk: could use more Outreach members rf: I will float the idea out there for new wg members; Tom Creighton might be a good focus group wrangler |
Action items
- Poll Smithsonian museums about use of ARKs with images, particularly IIIF presented images Riccardo Ferrante
- Explore SEO options for Wordpress websites that might improve ARK Alliance content in Google index ranking Riccardo Ferrante
- Draft blog posts 1) ARK implementation with the recently fully digitized US National Herbarium collections; 2) Use of a central digital asset management system to generate ARKs for different sub-organizations Riccardo Ferrante
- All: be on the lookout for new WG members