070621 Web Presence Conference Call

Agenda

1. Continue Brochure discussion; see if we can resolve disposition/use of brochure
2. Proposal to fork licensing discussion
3. Define current issues, problems with JA-SIG web presence
4. Define approach to addressing the issues, problems

Connection Information

Dial in: (800) 981-8084
Guest code: 8861483
Date and time: Thu June 21 2pmEDT

Minutes

(These are informal minutes from the call.)
Conference call came to order a few minutes after 2pmEDT, with Jonathan Markow presiding. This was observed to be the 2nd webpresence working group call.

Present on the call were Andrew Petro, Jim Helwig, Jason Shao, Paul Zablosky, and Johnathan Markow. Eric Dalquist joined the call just slightly after the meeting had begun.

Jonathan Markow observed that it would be helpful to have a better idea of who would be on any given conference call to inform decisions to call to order or to temporize giving everyone a chance to get dialed in, and took an action item to do so for future calls.

Jonathan reviewed the agenda and invited last-minute input, of which there was little.

Before considering the agenda, Paul raised and the group briefly discussed the question of to whom JA-SIG's web presence is intended to be targeted, commenting that technical geeks seem to be well-served at present, but other groups less well-served. After a little discussion, Jonathan transition to the main agenda commenting that JA-SIG seeks to grow its communication and web presence to address the broader range of stakeholders Paul raised.

Proceeding to the agenda, the group first considered the matter of the JA-SIG brochure (with the temporary logo and the birds on the cover with slogan "Ingenuity in Numbers". Jonathan invited comment on the brochure. Comments ranged from liking it to having a number of substantive nit-picky issues with it. Eric commented that aside from its color clash with existing web presence and therefore difficulty in actually using it, he liked the new logo. Jonathan thanked Eric for this input but re-asserted that after the negative feedback leading to and in the previous Webpresence group call, using this logo as-is for anything other than the material on which is already printed is off the table.

Jason tried to organize thought about the brochure in terms of its target audience, echoing Paul's earlier question about the target audience of JA-SIG's web presence. Jason was concerned that the brochure is very light on actual content and that its appropriateness for use at JA-SIG Denver was limited by its not presenting anything that people cannot be expected to already have "gotten" by being present at a JA-SIG conference in the first place. Jim had the apt line that the brochure's target audience is people who are amenable to being influenced by brochures.

Jason raised concern over the hardness of sell of including the JA-SIG membership form folded into a brochure that is light on actual content, that this becomes too forward an attempt to get peoples' dollars as opposed to a softer attempt to inform people about JA-SIG and its projects. He suggested that fold-ins with details about particular projects

The decision arrived at: have the brochures present at the conference, without the membership form folded in, and clearly available to but not pushed upon attendees. Jonathan will likely reference the brochures in the JA-SIG Membership Meeting and invite people to think of whether they know people would would appreciate receiving a brochure.

Andrew reminded the group of his desire that JA-SIG operate openly as a principle and suggested that applying this principle to the brochure means that if JA-SIG is handing out this brochure as part of its communication, then the PDF of the brochure should be available to all via JA-SIG's web presence. This call was slightly hampered by Paul not having seen the brochure in any format, physical or electronic. Jonathan took an action item to follow up.

Jason raised licensing terms issues around the brochure – does JA-SIG own it? Is the bird image royalty-free? Does JA-SIG have source files for this brochure to inform future efforts? Jonathan took an action item to follow up.

The availability of the JA-SIG membership form as a downloadable artifact, and the desirability that the online and physical versions be the same, the file be versioned, and different versions of the formal agreement not proliferate. Andrew suggested looking to a model where the signed document references a centrally maintained full statement of the agreement.

The group then considered agenda item 2, forking licensing discussion. Jonathan suggested and the group approved that the thorny problem of actual licensing be spun out to a new licensing working group. New groups seemed to need to include an email list and a Confluence presence. (Andrew related what Sakai does with collab.sakaiproject.org as an example). Jason observed the importance that working groups have a strong owner to make them happen. Jonathan volunteered / was volunteered to be that initial owner but may look to hand off primary leadership of the group in order to retain availability for other efforts. Andrew opined that while responsibility for figuring out the licensing itself was being spun out to the new group, the Webpresence working group retained responsibility for effectively communicating on the web whatever licensing the licensing working group figures out. He briefly updated the group on his changes to the uPortal license webpage to showcase that it is in fact a recognized, OSI-certified, FSF-acknowledged license.

When the group turned to consider items (3) and (4) above, Jason, suggested that they be reversed and that we basically skip to (4), that the problems are at least for the moment known well enough, and what is needed is an approach for addressing them.

Andrew pitched the idea of going after near-term quick wins. More positive news blurbs like Susan's YaleInfo post. The newsletter. Mini web presences for each of the JA-SIG mini-projects – channels and portlets, etc.

The group also briefly discussed the potential for meeting up during the upcoming conference. Andrew let people know that he would be looking for informal discussions around how to make the "hot" (frequently edited) parts of JA-SIG's websites easier to edit. He related the anecdote of Faizan asking him to post a news item announcing the 2.5.3.1 release and pointed out that it's pretty silly that Faizan needs to ask others to update the website even though he has locally at Rutgers at least two presumed experts on the Hypercontent system, Scott and Jason.

[JSG:Scott followed up on this minutes item to note that he does not claim to be an expert on Hypercontent outside the scope of the CAS space, assisted Faizan with updating the downloads pages only as a professional courtesy, and does not see himself as responsible for or much involved in any aspect of uPortal, including its web presence. Andrew noted in reviewing this minutes that he wishes it to be clear he meant and means no criticism of Faizan for his apprehensions about using Hypercontent to update the website. Andrew sees the system as presently very hard to use and so sees it as totally understandable that people are apprehensive about using it to update the site. He desires, however, that the answer to this problem not be that we twist our process (several release engineers with worthy items to announce) to conform to the tool (hard to use and collaborate, so few people empowered to post news.) That it instead be adopting/twisting technology (easier to use mechanisms to add news or to update uPortals in production listing) to meet the needs of our process (distributed contribution to website).]

This call like the previous tried to go over the allocated 60m. Brief discussion of whether to extend the call as a matter of course. Consensus to keep with 60m calls.

Discussion of whether and how to share minutes. Jason Shao visions around using Google Calendars or the like to publicize meetings of JA-SIG working groups. Andrew suggestion that we start with simple usage of per-workgroup email lists – "hey guys, we're going to have a meeting at such and such a day and time" .. "hey guys, we had our meeting as scheduled and the minutes are at such and such a wiki page". Decision that Andrew would post his notes as the minutes for this meeting, and resolve to plan for minutes at the beginning rather than the end of next call so someone takes better notes.