You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 18 Next »

Below is the agenda for the first meeting of the ARKs in the Open Advisory Group (AG). Teleconference access information has been provided to participants.

A CDL representative will act as interim Chair until a Chair is selected by the AG.

Ahead of the meeting:

  • Please review the draft project documents: visionresources and value statement, and roadmap.
  • Please consider potential working group members from your institution and community. Please bring potential names to the meeting.
  • Please consider if you would be interested in chairing or co-chairing a working group, and what those activities mean to you. For example the AG might decide that a chair is an AG member responsible for liaising with a working group, and a co-chair is a working group member responsible for managing the work of that group.

Discussion Items

Notes

Introductions

John K - creator of ARKs. Interim chair. We will ask the group to name a chair. Empower this group to make decisions. Capitalize momentum created at ARK summit in Paris earlier in 2018. Would love for people to feel that they're involved in sometime concrete and passionate.


Heather G.K. services coordinator at DuraSpace located in Durham NC. Working with John to get this group together.

Erin Tripp - Interim CEO of DuraSpace. Working on ARKs since January with CDL. Excited to be there.

Andrew Treloar - based in Melbourne Australia. On the edges of a variety of PID communities since 2003. Currently working for the Australia National Research Data Commons.

Frederic & Bertrand- BNF - working in metadata department for digital preservation.

Brian M - Work at University of Utah. Using ARKs for over 4 yrs. Core component of digital library system.

Kurt E at CDL. Managing the EZID service and responsible for infrastructure.

Kate W - Managing director of Portico. Working on the sustainability of not for profit services in particular for preservation. Thinking about not-for-profit business models. Sheila works more on the technical end.

Martin - Smithsonian and Biodiversity Heritage - SI just started a working group about identifiers.

Overview of existing draft project materials

John - We drafted there artifacts. They are subject to comment and feedback.

Vision - is the what, who and why.

Resources and value statement - this goes over the problem we're trying to solve and how we know we're actually making progress. We want to understand how we have met goals as a project. We have identifier resources we feel we'll need to meet these goals. We feel we will need outreach, technical and financial people. It's a wide range of things. We have profiles for what skills and leadership we feel we'll need. ACTION - share the expression of interest responses with this group.

Andrew - metrics look like they are infrastructure metrics instead of use of infrastructure metrics. Do you plan to update that later?

Andrew - Knowing how many ARKS there are is useful. Knowing how often these ARKS are actually used once created would also be useful

John - We want to get a sense of how many ARKs there are in the world. That particular metric we're interested in. Not a snap shot but live, up-to-date metrics.

Bertrand - I think the metrics section should be subject to discussion. Should we mention all of the OSSs that are using and creating ARKs.

Kurt - we would like to capture all resolver projects and the contributors to those.

ACTION - Add to the metrics list the number of ARKs worldwide.

Kurt - we will open these docs up and open for comment as we progress.

Roadmap - We would like to establish a chair to this group, three working groups, and eventually talk about governance and membership. Each of these goals are on our agenda for today.

Working Groups (WGs) approval and planning

"Strawperson" proposal: three 10-member WGs

Question: how to populate WGs – personal contacts, email to those who filled out the Expression of Interest, broad call to arks-forum mailing list?

  1. Technical WG
    1. Proposed short-term goals
      1. Planning work on the ARK IETF standardization process

      2. Consult with the ARK specification team

    2. Proposed longer-term goals
      1. Develop procedures for shared maintenance of the organizational (NAAN) registry

      2. Guiding the ARK specification through the IETF Informational RFC process

      3. Work with the Outreach Working Group to implement mechanisms to measure ARK usage

  2. Outreach WG
    1. Proposed short-term goals
      1. Reviewing an ARK community survey draft created by Bibliothèque nationale de France

      2. Consult with the wider ARK community

      3. Developing a process to gather requirements, priorities and models for shared community and infrastructure management

    2. Proposed longer-term goals
      1. Launching an initiative to measure ARK usage world-wide

        1. Consider how to use this as a community outreach mechanism

        2. Make the survey/measurement repeatable so that watching long-term trends is possible

        3. Develop a dissemination plan

  3. Fundraising WG
    1. Proposed short-term goals
      1. Developing a framework to fund priorities
    2. Proposed longer-term goals
      1. Pursuing funding with members of our community

John - we propose three working groups of about 10 ppl each. Hopefully you have people in mind who could participate on these groups.

CDL has been incubating the registry. This is assigning a unique number. CDL wants to remain involved but we also want to share this responsibility.

What do you think? Have we prioritized the right things?

Andrew - I have a scope question. My organization doesn't use ARKs. It's possible my questions aren't well informed. I'm thinking there are two missing pieces are 1) what you see as the scope of ARKs usage. Is there an implied scope to what they're used for. There may be value in making that more explicit. 2) Whether the activity being discussed here will happen in the ARK universe or whether we will consider interactions within the scholarly ecosystem.

John - We're generic on purpose. It's fair to ask what use cases we prioritize. It may not be particularly interesting to try to compete with DOI for example. Having said that we see interactions with identifier systems are hard to compare. It's not a consumer report checklist. It's not an enclosure that excludes other identifiers. We didn't create an ARK resolver because we didn't want to exclude others. We reject the notion that our resolver should be exclusive. The work of this group will help us out with this generic problem - our resolver will do ARK work it will do DOIs. It's a topic for us to consider.

Kurt - the scope of the use case for ARKs will be defined by this group, community members and users. People will bring their use cases and practical uses. Those will be discussed and priority based on need. We'll attempt to keep our minds open but we expect the community will create the scope.

Bertrand - March 22 we talked about the survey and it aligns with the outreach working group. Or is it in scope for the technical working group.

John - counting ARKs and persistence statements are in scope in our roadmap and we want the working groups to look at these.

Kurt - we wanted to make sure the initiatives that came out of the Summit could be collaborated on from people in this advisory group and working groups.



AG meeting structure

  • AG meeting frequency and time(s)
  • AG chair

Potential topics for future meetings

  • Assessment – how are we doing, what are we missing, what do we value
  • Governance and sustainability
  • AG structure: size, length of service, member replacement policy



  • No labels