Versions Compared

Old Version 12

changes.mady.by.user John Kunze

Saved on

compared with

New Version Current

changes.mady.by.user John Kunze

Saved on

Key

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

...

Attendees

Goals

  • Grant next steps; what is our identity going forward

Discussion items

TimeItemWhoNotes

announcements
Ongoing conversation with UCOP General Counsel on appropriateness of giving an ARK NAAN to a Cuban Journal of Military Medicine.

Todo items

:John  Mark Phillips approach

from last time:

Updates on shopping proposal with funders

draft next-gen ARK resolver funding proposal


  •  Mark Phillips approach IMLS (update: asked Ashley Sands at IMLS; new call for a 2-pager will be Oct 2, back in Feb
    Erin: would be with great to get feedback from IMLS
  •  Kurt Ewoldsen approach LYRASIS (update: initial contact, with follow-up pending)
  •  Kurt Ewoldsen confirm CDL overhead (update: 17.8% generally)
  •  John Kunze ask Chris M about proposal and ask if it might be a good fit for Moore Foundation

Updates on shopping proposal with funders

draft next-gen ARK resolver funding proposal
  • (update: Chris now at Stanford directing their Data Science Initiative)

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.


Erin: have you done the catastrophizing exercises? (no)
Erin: like "ARKs Alliance"
Mark: me too
Kurt: acronym AA?
Erin: in terms of financial sustainability modeling, the membership model is tough
right now in this period of cuts. My IMLS CARES proposal is to investigate
these issues, comparing resourcing for open source vs proprietary products
Kurt: this could be useful

John: separately, the NAAN registry WG could use some technical help to get us over the last hump of creating a curator-friendly interface to the automated validation of new entries and creation of anonymized derivative files that feed the n2t resolver.
ACTION: John will write up what's needed and share with this group

Action items

  •