Page Tree:

Child pages
  • W2 - Service Framework

This wiki space contains archival documentation of Project Bamboo, April 2008 - March 2013.

Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

Service Framework

Table of Contents

Questions and concerns

Plenary notes

Group 6

  • How do we expand on what's available and make it accessible?
  • How is scholarly practice attached to a service identified? What is the method for selecting that service?

Group 1

  • How will existing tools work with to fit the service framework?
  • How might we make sure that our framework supports the live creative act (capturing that content for use)?

Group 5

  • Does not follow directions; spent all our time talking about institutional commitment

Group 6 notes

  • Has been done already?
  • Succeeded or failed?
  • Ownership (privacy, anonymizing)
  • Measures for success of failure
  • What is the model to get the thing rolling FTEs?
  • Should resources be pulled from different institutions? Hard
  • Maybe main institution commitments and move forward
  • What is the big win for the institution?
  • Priority of the services
  • Are we meeting the needs?
  • How to assure connection to need of participation
  • Driver is to a bottleneck or how can that be overcome?
  • Democratize by simplifying and lower the bar to allow scholar's to jump in
  • How to manage the gap between the different spectrum of age/training
  • Shaping the message of a service framework? Bringing it to non IT field
  • What is the cost/benefit? Adoption, maintenance, etc.
  • How to make it relevant, and convey the message of relevancy
  • Services become a personal research environment? How to share them
  • Privacy and how people can opt in
  • Peer review for the process
  • Enhance and transform research in humanity should be central (building around that)
  • Should that be driven the services?


  • How can we expand on what is available and make it universally accessible?
  • How is the scholarly practice attached to a service and what is the method of service selection been conducted?

Risks, rewards and plan

Plenary notes - risks and rewards

  • Sense of disconnect between presentation yesterday of technical architecture and need to get input from A&H scholars
  • Feedback was that A&H scholars didn't see themselves in the list of tasks or boxes in the diagram
  • Belief that Bamboo can deliver some sort of tools/architecture that will support scholarship
  • Somewhere we've lost the principle of mapping scholars to strategic direction of technology
  • Focus on scoping: how do we determine it
  • We can't produce everything, we can only specify a small portion and write a grant to produce something that enables cool tools and changes to scholarship
  • Everything from sharing services to redefining scholarship
  • How do we sort through these different agendas to deliver something concrete?
  • As people talk about service framework, have to understand how A&H scholars' needs map to services
  • How to regain some of that connection, empower A&H scholars that their needs are being addressed Or allow us to talk about that back at our institutions
  • Discussion of different methods to support this
  • To continue moving forward, we need to maintain the vision of what the particular things are that are important to support
  • What are the use cases, visions, etc that we agree on as a community that Bamboo should help enable? How do they map to the tasks, green boxes?
  • Productive questions, though no specific answers
  • Request for more humanities scholars in the services framework group
  • Approach to these services as collecting everything the scholars do, then chunk up from there - is that the best approach for services?
  • Notion of "case study" - thinking about possible projects these services could produce tools for
  • Started bringing up specific types of development environments, what the problems were

Plenary notes - plan

  • Look at the list of activities and go through them - find tools that exemplify each activity
  • Long list of grouped activities
  • Activities are too atomized; what would this mean to scholars?
  • How do we allow scholars to re-contextualize those activities, given they all came out of * workshop 1 where they described what they did
  • Original storyline was lost in translating information over from workshop 1
  • Workgroups should try to expand in addition to the activities, to go recontextualize everything
  • Build stories - scholar/technologist or scholar/librarian pairs; local Bamboo groups might do this work
  • Try to create storylines; a constraint is that the storyline/scholarly process should be described in terms of those activities - a base vocabulary through which stories are told
  • That's what the demonstrator is
  • Urge that these be grounded in reality - something that someone actually does/has done
  • So, working groups both flesh out activities and build and encourage others to build storylines that recontextualize these
  • Reconstruct those from the notes from workshop 1
  • Before break, used examples to figure out how to talk to one another about frameworks
  • After break, lost the connection of talking to one another - lapse into previous vocabularies
  • Faculty member prepared to leave - not being heard, was encouraged to stay by the group, and had a remarkable result
  • "Stories" became the squishy filling in the "Oreo cookie" - this is exactly what we felt was missing early on
  • We don't agree on what stories means yet, but now we have a common focus

Group notes

Questions that need to be addressed to shape this direction

  • How do we expand on what's available and make it accessible?
  • How is scholarly practice attached to a service identified? What is the method for selecting that service?
  • How will existing tools work with to fit the service framework?
  • How might we make sure that our framework supports the live creative act (capturing that content for use)?


Task desciptions

  • Review the preliminary activities list
  • Flesh out missing activities
  • Name each activity
  • Roughly define each activity
  • Note related tools
  • Note related Standards


  • Which of these tasks needs further clarification?
  • Should any tasks be added?
  • In what order would you prioritize these?


What needs to be done before Workshop Three? (Jan 12)

  • Here are some quick suggested tasks I drafted on the plane returning to Madison (Jim Muehlenberg), feel free to hack away at these!  Most of them were discussed in the breakout groups and the two post-meeting meetings:
  • 1.  Lay out information architecture for both "Stories" and "Activities" entities and their relationships - templates?
  • 2.  Consider the best tool(s) for capture of these - is it just the wiki, or something else that is more workable?
  • 3.  Harvest stories from wiki content from workshops 1
  • 4.  Get stories from each institution
  • 5.  Generate stories from each 4/6 presentation at workshops 1 and 2
  • 6.  Harvest stories from scenarios in proposal, elsewhere?
  • 7.  Other methods, other media to capture stories?
  • 8.  Begin analysis of proposed activities while stories are being gathered (the activities in the theme groups)
  •      -- refactor, cluster, generate new ones, tweak, etc
  •      -- fill in details of template
  •      -- linking together as needed
  •      -- include component steps -- look for entities (digital resources), look for service capabilities (what to do with them)
  • 9.  As stories come in, analyze stories for references to existing activities and generate new activities as needed
  •      -- see 8. for more details
  •      -- link stories to activities, existing or new ones
  •      -- feedback to originators, clarify as needed
  •      -- further inform the activity analysis