Terminology, spec transition plan

Discussion items


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: we may be able to supply a new zoom link, with Bess Missell as co-host
m: we could post this question by email to the group

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".

  • the NAAN WG is ok with this terminology
  • propose that we begin with small experiments to see if it helps in practice; withdraw or revise if it doesn't help

m: seems fine in principle; could be confusing; ok with trialing it
m: I don't see it as addressing the highest priority in outreach, which is continued confusion about to do after getting the NAAN and ending up (via google search?) asking EZID for an account
j: we think we addressed this in the new Getting Started document, but there may be traces of the old information out on the open web still; suggest we watch for sources of confusion and try to address/change what we can

Quickstart guide is live on the website

  • top menu link: GET STARTED

r: ACTION I'll talk to our Wordpress people about how to improve prominence of this page

ARK & IIIF blog post

  • need volunteers to break it down into sub-posts

j: much IIIF experience at SI?
r: more of an art museum thing
r: ACTION but I'll ask around

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)

  • what is STARTDATE? how do we determine what STARTDATE is?
  • when do we change documentation on the website and wikipedia?
  • recall that all sites producing newform ARKs must also serve all their ARKs in newform or oldform, regardless of production date, eg, 2025
  • at CUTOVERDATE, all sites should serve all their ARKs in either newform or oldform, regardless of production date, eg, 2006

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