Page tree

Versions Compared


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




Todo items:

  • John to ask INCIPIT (Swiss) project to comment on EOSC PID policy doc (update: it turns  out they had already commented, asking ARK to be included, but no action had been taken; they asked again and got an answer)

Updates on shopping proposal with funders

draft next-gen ARK resolver funding proposal

What is our brand? For example, should we continue with the ARKsInTheOpen brand, or are we now something like the ARK Alliance?

This discussion item came out of the last meeting of the Outreach working group.  The task started as a revision of the existing wiki presence and led to a pass through an Open Canvas exercise that led to further identity questions.  We are also in need of a logo.

The perspective of some members of that group is that ARKsInTheOpen and associated wiki pages describes a project to create an active community around the ARK identifier which appears (at least to them) to have been accomplished and that now would be a good time to shift from the focus from the initial creation to a focus on maintaining and expanding what has been put in place.  The initial AITO wiki space does indeed refer mainly to the initial collaboration with Duraspace, now LYRASIS, to define goals and set into place a structure for participation by others in the ARK community, including and encouraging organizations beyond CDL to take leadership roles and help to promote related activity and technical progress. 

So while we were updating these wiki pages, the question arose about whether we have entered a new phase and if we should modify our public facing content to reflect that change going forward.  Do others feel that it is the right time to mark a change from creating a community to a community that has been created?  If so, then that opens up a series of questions starting with how we should refer to ourselves going forward. 

Should we continue with ARKsintheOpen (have we created "brand" recognition that would be useful to continue)?  Or should we find some new term like "The ARK Alliance" or should we just refer to ourselves as the ARK community?  We would like to have a consensus on this issue to take back to the working group for further action.