Versions Compared

Old Version 3

changes.mady.by.user Lydia Tang (Unlicensed)

Saved on

compared with

New Version Current

changes.mady.by.user Lydia Tang (Unlicensed)

Saved on

Key

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

...

Attendees

Goals

  • Feedback from Christine di Bella and Christine Kim on initial thoughts of the recommendations and their format.
  • Discuss plan to share recommendations, gather and incorporate feedback, and submit final recommendations.
  • Any questions?

Discussion items

1763
TimeItemWhoNotes
Feedback from Christine di Bella and Christine Kim
  • a tremendous amount of work! really encouraging to see all this work.
  • interested to hear this discussion on how ready/done this is for distribution
  • initial reaction is – it's a lot! certainly don't want to send it out to people to see how big it is and make that prevent folks from going further.
  • is there a way to guide people through this experience?
  • perhaps more in terms of visual component – side by side comparison? or high level summaries – abstract? rearrange table of contents in a more linear format – follow the user manual?
  • purpose of sharing recommendations to the membership? maintain a level of communication and transparency since so many people are working in the system. folks may come up with potentially better solutions possibly. some parts of the documentation haven't addressed some issues, such as digital objects and dealing with multiple repositories, probably because folks within this group haven't had much experience with that – so input would be appreciated
  • how much description should we provide? table of contents be the most distilled access point and incrementally find a level of description that delivers the information but doesn't drown us in it. most digestable as possible is great. if something is too wordy, please feel free to cut it down and clarify.
  • comments in the final document. first vetting within siewg across different groups before it gets distributed to a wider group of people. how much cross-group feedback has there been so far? perhaps each group assigned to look at two different groups? perhaps another 2 week round of review? perhaps with all sections compiled into a "final" document. and assign each group with two different sections to review.
  • Find your group on this team roster, and review the two groups that follow: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/19VKSu2rWIBlfyXcpP4YejTaE4G87ZfDSv2s1p7dlOec/edit?usp=sharing Example – Group A reviews content from Groups B&C; Group B reviews content from Groups C&D; etc. Comment within documents, 2 weeks to review.
  • short overview document that puts it all in a succinct way, that comes before the table of contents so people know where to go. also does make sense to do more vetting if we need to. this document: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1C1fx2qMfW9m6E4NGanGQcv8udSr04u4MbvzhP2DzhoE/edit?usp=sharing

"The Plan" 
  • 3  3 phase project: 1st phase of developing specifications is completed.  2nd phase of sharing specifications and incorporating feedback.  3rd phase to submit final recommendations ideally by mid-December.
  • Editors help create Table of Contents linking to our documents, organizing them intellectually.
  • Plan to share the Specs folder with the ArchivesSpace member list hopefully next week.
  • Teams address comments and feedback within their Topic docs.  
  JIRAS  

 JIRAS
Jira Legacy
serverSystem JIRA
serverId36c489e2-4fb0-353a-985b-64038401be2f
keyAR-1763
Jira Legacy
serverSystem JIRA
serverId36c489e2-4fb0-353a-985b-64038401be2f
keyAR-
1769

Action items

  •  Cross-group feedback: Find your group on this team roster, and review the two groups that follow: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/19VKSu2rWIBlfyXcpP4YejTaE4G87ZfDSv2s1p7dlOec/edit?usp=sharing 
  •  

    ·         Visual Layout will review Organization of menus and Navigation

    ·         Organization of menus will review Navigation and Data entry

    ·         Navigation will review Data entry and User accounts and permissions

    ·         Data entry will review User accounts and permissions and Customization/Functionality

    ·         User accounts and permissions will review Customization/Functionality and the Excel doc by Time-saving devices

    ·         Customization/Functionality will review the Excel doc by Time-saving devices and Visual Layout

    ·         Time-saving devices will review all of the docs, since many of their specs overlapped with other groups

  •  Make the recommendations lean, mean, and very digestible and will share it soon with the community soon after the next meeting in 2 weeks.

Meeting recording and chat transcript

View file
nameaudio_only.m4a
height250
View file
namechat.txt
height250