Versions Compared

Key

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

...

  • Concerns were raised about the way the current implementation exposes the path to files as the RDF subject rather than an opaque identifier-based URI. It was agreed that the follow-up conversation should be brought to the wider community.
  • Future meetings will be organized by a committee, initially consisting of representatives from the four institutions in attendance at this meeting (NLM, NASA, NAL, UMD).
  • Goals for future meetings are to further expand the active participation of local LAM institutions who are either using or interested in Fedora.
  • Some ideas for future meeting programs:
    • Training/workshops on specific related technologies, such as Samvera, Islandora, IIIf, etc.
    • Perhaps a "Fedora 101" training would be useful for attracting non-users interested in exploring what Fedora is
    • Explore aligning FUG meetings with other local meetings as a way to increase attendance (CNI?)
    • Try to advertise more thoroughly and widely
    • Explore connecting with other FUGs (either a nationwide "virtual connect" type meeting, or perhaps a physical meetup with the Mid-Atlantic FUG – possibly with Baltimore as the meeting place)
    • The presence of a Duraspace rep at the meeting is desireable desirable and should be maintained if possible going forward.
  • We should look to create a presence for Fedora and the FUG at the upcoming C4L in Washington – though it is probably too late to get formally on the program, we should seek out ways to create some presence for the FUG there.

...