This wiki space contains archival documentation of Project Bamboo, April 2008 - March 2013.
Workshop Two: Discussion Notes
October 16, 2008
John Pylus, Oxford IT
Ruth Kirkham, Oxford IT
Carole Ann Fabian, ARTStore
Tom Laughner, Smith IT
Noah Wittman, Berkeley IT
Janie Vanpee, Smith College
Sandiway Fong, University of Arizona
Sandiway: Bamboo could help develop standards
Ruth: We could identify existing standards
Quinn: Some scholars express concern about normalization.
John: We would love to have standards. We're happy to work with any standard, so long as it allows us to do what we want to do.
Sandiway: Standards evolve, not fixed in stone. You are always updating your browser for example.
Tom: We had conversation about seven direction: 3, 4, 5, 6 Core Directions. The others are secondary.
Tom: All of 3,4,5,and 6 could fit under services framework.
Sandiway: Moving beyond silos: Bamboo should be a place where people can get information about existing projects, dialogue among it and humanities scholars.
Ruth: Trying to engage with faculty a challenge.
Carole: We've asked scholars how they related to community. Scholars relate to their colleagues at other universities.
Sandiway: loss of and credit for intellectual property, concerns barrier to broader sharing often leads to silo work.
Tom: Having worked at institutions of different sizes. Faculty don't want to leave their buildings. physical architecture is often a barrier.
John: We've found small scale collaboration. handful of people working together.
Sandiway: Issues of trust.
Carole: Youth are naturally sharing more, until they get pulled into the tenure review process and become more protective.
Sandiway: Concerns about hacking reliable and secure cms.
Quinn: incentives for participation: We had idea that creation of a community, or broadly used technology could/should gather data that could be folded into a tenure review process.