Rough comparison

English versionFrench version
Presentation (persistance, inflections, persistence = a matter of service, resolution tools : Noid, EZID)Presentation (persistence, list of what ARKs can identify, qualifier part)
Structure (NAAN, NMAH, qualifier)Structure :
URL / name ARK (error : the name ARK is considered a URL in the article)
1 identifier, 1..* NMAH
Commented example (actionable / non actionable part)
NMA (make the identifier actionable)
List of sample NAANs + presentation of the NAAN registryUse of ARKs
- List of NAANs
- Use by the BnF
- Use by the CDL
Generic services :
Access services (what it does)
Policy service (what it does)
Description service (what it does)

First analysis

The French version is not a translation of the English one. Each version has been conceived independently from the other. The English version is better, it should be the basis for evolution ; then the French version could be translated from the English one.

As mentioned during last meeting, a list of NAANs is unnecessary. A link to the NAAN registry is enough

Corrections of errors in the French version (the ARK id is not a URL but can be (and is in a majority of cases) embedded in a URL ; neither is it a URI even though it is based on the URI syntax
Additions in the english version: add the distinction between the ARK name and the URL that can embed it.

Target structure for the article

  • Presentation (could be kept as is)
  • History of ARKs
  • Governance of ARKs (CDL, AITO group, open nature of ARKs, open forum)
  • Generic services (before the structure)
  • Structure (URL vs ARK, anatomy of the ARK : scheme/NAAN/name). Proposal : illustrate with examples
  • Use of ARKs : proposal : areas of use with the map of NAANs ; center of gravity of ARKs = memory institutions (but not limited to them

With open questions :

  • Should we add a section "relationship with other identifiers"? I think it might prove a time-consuming task which might lead to endless discussions on Wikipedia; we could be considered biassed as the ARK outreach group. In any case we can only state facts
  • Should we add a "Tools" section? It might be better to point to an external list of tools (as for NAANs)

  • No labels