Navigation:
Documentation
Archive



Page Tree:

Child pages
  • Workshop 5 - Voting

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

Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

Introduction to voting

1:33

Q: what is "atlas data"?

1:33

DAG: All the data in the atlas.

1:33

(it's been a long workshop)

1:33

Pointers to tools and content, data, description, narratives, recipes, other metadata, ability to cite all that, other conversations and discussions, all that and more

1:34

Q: When we have info about recipes, narratives, etc and delivering into existing environments, this is hooks whereby people can search directly? Also, where does the data live?

1:34

How does it connect to other places the info might be?

1:35

DAG: Potential data re: people and projects - something that could be IN the atlas as well; that data does exist in a number of places, including in each of our institutions' local systems to track faculty research interests, work, etc

1:35

Enter data once, use it in multiple places; but detail needs to be figured out

1:36

In the atlas description, a lot of work re: data and data model and APIs but on top of that ,various interfaces (that could be developed for Bamboo, to connect to other environments)

1:36

Reformulation of scholarly network area - pull out, tear off work around interfaces and connection to other environments, put that here. Unique Bamboo front-end, and also interconnecting and playing in other environments, information going in multiple directions

1:37

Can we make it as easy as possible to capture data in other environments for the Atlas

1:37

Kaylea: sticking w/ Bamboo philosophy of "link, don't copy" - hope is that it's a list of data that does live elsewhere; links to institutional repositories, rather than trying to harvest

1:37

Jim: Basically all end-user touch-points would be through scholarly networking, regardless of what they'd support

1:38

VRE, Bamboo Community Environment, wiki replacement, all these pieces with end-user touchpoints should now be in space of 4.1

1:38

Kaylea: Yes, that's the proposal - centralizing touchpoints

1:39

Q: will you have a definition of the community somewhere?

1:39

CJK: Section 5 has that definition

1:39

DAG: We've heard a number of suggestions here about being careful about the use, defining it, community design, etc, some more explanation would help us

1:40

This is an area of work, not a single interface

1:40

In the future, how people will find/use services, how that would work - not exclusive to just coming through the 4.1 work group

1:42

Q: If we take it as a given that a front end embedded w/in a social environment like Facebook will not deliver full functionality as the actual Atlas site... true? If that's a given, why do it at all? Why not just use the actual site? A lot of effort will be put into Facebook apps, Sakai modules, Blackboard modules, etc. Some degree of convenience, but it will be a short Google search away to go to the actual Atlas site.

1:42

Maybe there won't be an actual Atlas site, but a high-level repository, and these will be your points of entry, but I don't think we've conceived of the atlas that way

1:43

Also, would it be possible, or did the group think about extending the kinds of virtual environments listed here into things like portals, Vivo at Cornell (directory of faculty and related research interest labs, resources, etc)

1:43

Or is emphasis squarely on more socially oriented networking sites?

1:43

CJK: Have to keep in mind, Bamboo intends to fit in to where people are working, not stand out

1:44

Exmaples here, Sakai/Facebook/Ning, could be anything else. Different encivornments where people are already conducting work, how can people come to them?

1:44

We can build all this capability to have a super-use of the atlas-- need for engineering purposes if nothing else

1:44

But content inside of atlas, services/capabiltities developed over time, need to be able to be represented in ways that make sense for context of use and communities they're being used by

1:44

Don't always need all the info of the atlas, may only want small piece that connects relationships together

1:45

Maintaining that principle from the original scholarly networking group

1:45

The nod to websites is the all-encompassing front end of THE ATLAS, but the idea of one ore more different types of connecting, re-enforces ability of what Bamboo does, brings it to different environments

1:45

Proposal is that insofar as there's an actual Atlas Site, scholarly networking would include the creation of that site as part of their portfolio

1:46

Same people focused on "how do scholars want to see this where they already live" would also focus on "what do they want if they come to us"?

1:46

Don't have to be on a network to see this content

1:46

People who think about people would all get together

1:46

Q: Concern is still that, from own experience, a very tiny fraction are on social networking sites

1:46

Of the ones who are there, a small fraction have research in mind

1:46

That will change, but that's the situation today

1:46

Expect the same for the next 2-3 years

1:47

Q: Yesterday mentioned open source video platform; one of great selling points was way it integrated w/ learning management systems, Wordpress, Drupal - not something Bamboo itself has to pay for

1:47

If university has a big buy into a given system, if Bamboo can publish the way to bridge it in, a university might pay for it and share code back

1:48

People working in Sakai environment don't evne need to know there's an Atlas site, it just has what they want

1:48

DAG: Not trying to come up with definitive answer/solution, just where to situate work

1:48

Focus on user touchpoints, user experience/interface, collaborative/VRE, this should be the locus

1:48

CJK: There's been at most 2 hours of thought in this revision

1:48

This is result of conversations that have happened TODy

1:48

*TODy

1:49

(argh!) TODAY

1:49

Are you comfortable with that, or do you still have a lot of questions?

1:49

Q: When it says that the part of PB that people "touch" on a regular basis, talking about external people? So things like narratives/recipes, that's touching the scholars, so those live here too?

1:51

DAG: All the data and data models and how we capture all that, that's stored in the Atlas as a data store. The idea behind the Atlas is that it'd be well developed such that data could be exposed in all sorts of different places. Including being able to interoperate. We have put some of that front-end work around the Atlas into the Atlas section. AT the same time, in scholarly networking section, this has to do w/ connection to social networking sites. Now it puts aside the focus on social networking, thinking just the places were we do work on the web (whatever that is), and all the work here re: how to connect Atlas information, and the unique views or interfaces built in our own web presence, handled through this kind of focus.

1:51

Logically, it's clean; does it have a negative impact on the Atlas? Tell us with your vote.

1:52

CJK: W4 - interest in leadership, interest in particular areas; that influenced this set of areas of work

1:52

We then asked you to think about your institution and its possible investments

1:53

Now we're making sure that the major areas of work (we'e had 2 major changes + ripple effect) - do they stil represent the right major area of work for PB to undertake in its proposal moving forward? And the scope of that - is the scope of what's been outlined, still reasonable?

1:53

We've had a paragraph describing an entirely revised section fo work

1:53

What's important to us,   can we still advance this work?

1:53

If not, there's a lot more work to do and we have to go through this again electronically

1:53

Are we still on the right track as a community?

1:53

If so, great, we'll continue.

1:54

Three major areas of work - are these right? Are those areas within a reasonable scope?

1:54

Ballot: trying to achieve consensus. We're caling it 75% approval in a major area of work. Based on total vote count, slips of paper, and on-line form for virtual participation.

1:54

We know the scope is imperfect, but is it reasonable.

1:55

No = wrong area of work, wrong scope, or both

1:55

Abstain = just don't know; not comfortable -> no and/or abstain don't count towards consensus


Voting results

2:36

43% A&H faculty, technologists 41%, content 12%

2:36

Issue of faculty representation

2:36

Pretty strong yes of votes on everything

2:36

Services platform: 49 yes, 1 abstain

2:36

Atlas: 41 yes, 8 abstain

2:37

Revised scholarly network: 44 yes, 1 no, 6 abstain

2:37

There may be overlap in abstaining

2:37

Almost everyone wants to eliminate Bamboo Community into Section 5

2:38

Q: Overestimating the value of some of the content we're collecting and storing in the atlas

2:39

Q: "My name is John Coleman, and I'm an abstainer."

2:39

"I thought of being a no, but I thought that was unfair."

2:39

Direction of Bamboo Atlas is fine, but I have big reservations about the scope, both as it was described in original document and fear discussions haven't narrowed scope at all

2:40

Q: I'm also an abstainer; when you're reading texts or doing markup, when you find a place that doesn't make sense, it's a place of interest but also a place where if you slice/dice differently, problem goes away

2:41

Atlas is a confusing chunk - what's in it, what does it do, trying to tease it out, etc.

2:41

Not clear exactly what the atlas does; pieces of it that one has associated with it are useful. Not trying to eliminate what it's doing. But might make it cleaner to take pieces of Atlas (esp. ones that have to do with Bamboo users) and move to scholarly networking, and rename the whole thing

2:41

Take parts related to services/tools/work, move into services -> 2 areas of effort

2:41

Throwing it out as a way of thinking about these things differently

2:42

Another abstainer: didn't consider saying no, abtained because I didn't feel I understood clearly enough what the scope of the Atlas was

2:43

Definitely bits in there that sound useful and good, but the other point is that the Atlas is the bit that can easily be successful or not depending on uptake; seen other projects trying to do things in UK scope, spent lots of effort, put up some content, there's some stuff but they don't have a feeling of life, would be easy if the Atlas isn't done right, to be in the same position

2:43

Don't see enough to be able to say, success or not

2:43

DAG: Most institutions wanted to be involved in Atlas

2:43

Atlas does have one of biggest risks of failure - insufficeint continued use re: adding content, adding interpretations

2:44

Wouldn't want Bamboo to be see as the Atlas, and Atlas failure = Bamboo failure

2:44

Aware of both opportunity and making sure it's socped well and can succeed from start

2:44

Q: Voted yes for some of those reasons, but put a comment: grave reservations about scope

2:44

I think you hear that already - that really has to be addressed

2:45

Abstainer: lack of scope that was disquieting here, wonder whether Atlas and Scholarly Networking should be combined to have more focus

2:45

If that's not a decision out of this workshop, maybe that topic should be reviewed in 3-6 months

2:45

Abstainer: Others told me to abstain.

2:46

I asked, "if I wanted to say, how many editions of Hamlet are there? How much stuff has to do with Cairo in collections aggregated in Bamboo? And that's the most important question to me, what do we know about topic X? That's not in the Atlas because it's too big, but it should be SOMEWHERE - huge problem as you scale up and try to make it attractive"

2:46

Should be somewhere in Bamboo, don't know where it falls.

2:46

Q: One way of addressing scope concerns for Atlas - let's not call it something that hs a life beyond 1-3 years, let's call it a report.

2:46

A closed thing, and a done thing

2:47

No such reports out there that would cover what the Atlas seeks to do

2:47

Abstainer: One of my issues - somewhere between W3 and now, Atlas moved from facilitative function to support the design, to being a resource in and of itself

2:47

That's not a bad thing, but that's part of the problem we're having getting our heads around it

2:47

It's morphed, but it's bigger and stakes are higher

2:48

Real problem w/ how scholalry networking and atlas are now structured

2:48

How will they be administered, breaking it up like this?

2:48

Coudln't get head around administrative piece - if Atlas people and scholarly networking people aren't together... you guys are the deciders of who wins?

2:48

Unworkable splitting

2:49

DAG: Should scholarly network and atlas be one thing with multiple sides? Or is this breakdown, presuming we can do the right coordination, appropriate?

2:49

Q: Helpful to visualize what you actually enter when PB is up and running

2:50

If you open something, and it's a scholarly networking thing, you're opening and leaving it almost immediately - it's this process where PB is evaluating, giving sense of direction, having some way of entering something that the community is directing towards its needs and sense of a future

2:50

That's where you need to have this particular separation

2:50

It's not an index of what's available, it's something that's worked on; working on centrally rather than diffuse network that requires that distinction

2:51

Q: A lot of people have problems with Atlas scope - not just how it interacts w/ the other parts of Bamboo, more important problem of scope is what kind of registries and catalogs is the Atlas going to include?

2:51

It's going to get out of date

2:51

If we try to make a way of aggregating all info of interest, it's going to be incoomplte, arbitrary, and out of date

2:51

Need to define scope of the information that's in the Atlas - what info will we aggregate and make visible here?

2:52

Information should be on one hand info about Bamboo services

2:52

Can include from other existing catalogs and resource discovery services

2:53

Trying to make our own registries and lists of stuff that might be of interest is where we'll get into problems

2:53

Abstainer: "It's what all the cool kids are doing."

2:53

We're becoming layered in terms of services, what Atlas is, scholarly networking as interface-- don't know if that's where we were going, at least, there was a different thrust for scholarly networking and atlas

2:53

Were going to be things we'd develop to solve problems in the humanities

2:53

Being conflated in some ways that I'm having a hard time understanding

2:54

A lot of things I see as being in the Atlas, but saying that scholarly networking is almost the interface to the Atlas, I don't see it that way

2:54

One thing we had little discussion about - having overall PB community at large having an Explore/Plan/Build activity as part of funding

2:54

Haven't talked about that much in examples

2:55

How is that going to happen? What are we going to decide to build?

2:55

Scope of Atlas for this project is a scope that's more bounded, doesn't come out as a clear "how to do it" but a more bounded scope, what is PB doing, what are we staring to explore and plan for future building?

2:56

Ongoing life to things being stored there, actively being used/stored/planned/built

2:56

A registry is a hard thing to avoid

2:56

That's not a good thing

2:56

But if it's the things that are actively being pursued by the community, that'd be good

2:57

DAG: Going to have an Atlas demonstrator to happen this fall; if we do that, we may take some of these concerns and issues and tease them out and focus the scope and challenges to build on that

2:57

There are elements that are important, but questions of which elements, and how to do them so they don't fall flat for the future

2:58

Some abstentions were from within, and outside, the Atlas group

2:58

There seems to be trust for people who weren't part of the services platform discussion that we know what we're talking about, and/or fundamental value

2:58

Jim: Why not more abstaining votes on platform? That's the furthest abstraction from faculty, all about technology

2:59

Without more concrete knowledge of tool/content partnerships, why not abstain?

2:59

Q: Maybe voting ignorance and blind faith



 

  • No labels