Page tree

Versions Compared


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




ArchiveSpace will be putting ARK support in their next release (JK)

(KE) 2nd round of surveys will be sent early Sept to avoid European vacations.

Draft ARK Wikipedia "History" section

The concept of ARKs grew out of identifier work begun in 1992 in the newly
formed IETF URI working group as it was trying to finalize the URL
specification in the face of what seemed like a fatal flaw, namely, the high
rate at which URLs were observed to be breaking. In the push to standardize the
URL, the problem of broken links came to be defined as out of scope, becoming
instead a job that the IETF URN effort would address by formalizing a scheme
that used indirect identifiers. By 1998, four such schemes (Handle, URN, PURL,
and DOI), all based on native URL redirection, claimed to provide persistent

The ARK spec was publised from CDL...

The first ARK implementation was in 200? ...

In 2006 the BnF adopted the ARK, with the result that many French institutions
later adopted it....

(KE) First draft above.  Need to refrain from editorializing.  Add names of those involved.  Focus on ARKs, not N2T or other applications (at least in the history).


Reach out for possible ES (Spanish) translation

(KE) John has reached out to our friends in Argentina but has no confirmed assistance yet.  Maybe contact Cesar in Peru?  Is it reasonable to start with running the English version through Google Translate and then have a native language speaker review from that basis, as they will likely need to deal with specific technical language and concepts.  Having something in a language is better than nothing, providing it is not woefully inaccurate.

Maria will take a quick look at what Google Translate does with a section of the FAQ.


Draft wikipedia revised section headings

(KE) John will ping Tracy and ask that she share the outline via e-mail before our next meeting.


Review Wikipedia Conflict of Interest (COI) entry:

Editors with a COI should follow Wikipedia policies and best practices scrupulously:

  • you should disclose your COI when involved with affected articles;
  • you are strongly discouraged from editing affected articles directly;
  • you may propose changes on talk pages (by using the {{request edit}} template), or by posting a note at the COI noticeboard, so that they can be peer reviewed;
  • you should put new articles through the Articles for Creation (AfC) process instead of creating them directly;
  • you should not act as a reviewer of affected article(s) at AfC, new pages patrol or elsewhere;
  • you should respect other editors by keeping discussions concise.

(KE) We can try an experiment by submitting an edit through the "propose changes" function and see what the results are (how quickly it turns around).  Seems contrary to the spirit by trying to game the system by having someone else submit edits that we are writing/suggesting.

all site (reference feedback on difficulty of finding info about ARKs in one place)

(KE) Portal page should have:  History, FAQs, Technical Docs (spec), Link to NAAN request, contact e-mail, links to all other sources of information, links to any presentations or other information, mailing lists?, Slack channel?

Peter agrees having a paid engagement to create the ARK portal site would be a reasonable use of membership fees or contributed funds.  Maria asked if we have a timeline for providing this web site.

Action items