November 8, 2013


Dial: +1 (530) 881-1400
Access Code: 651025


  • Anders Conrad, Royal Library (Facilitator)

  • Linda Newman, University of Cincinnati (Notetaker)
  • Tom Cramer, Stanford

  • Bess Sadler, Stanford

  • Mike Giarlo,Penn State

  • Mark Notess, Indiana

  • Chris Colvard, Indiana

  • Rick Johnson, Notre Dame

  • Claire Stewart, Northwestern

  • Ray Lubinsky, UVA

  • Steven Anderson, BPL
  • Adam Wead, Rock Hall

  • Jim Tuttle, Duke

  • Christopher Awre, Hull
  • Richard Greene, Hull


  1. Roll Call
    1. Welcome New Folks 
  2. Call for Agenda Items
  3. Next Call
    1. Date: December 13th, 2013 
    2. Facilitator:  Adam Wead
    3. Notetaker: Mike Giarlo
  4. Grants (upcoming, status updates)
    1. Penn State Grant for Zotero
      Mike: They submitted a prospectus to Mellon who indicated interest,  and they are putting finishing touches on the application.  This would be a partnership with the Center for History and New Media at George Mason, to develop a module that could be repurposed by other Hydra adopters, and would be bi-directional communication between Zotero and a Hydra Head.  He will place it on the agenda again when they have any news about the grant.

    2. ORCID grant by Notre Dame
      Rick: The grant was awarded; they will mix in development of ORCID support with Curate work; the deadline is May 21st to have something complete, at which time they will report to the ORCID community meeting in Chicago.  He will post information online about dates and write something for  Tom suggested an occasional airing as the work heats up.

    3. Others? 
      Tom:  The Fedora steering group met at DLF and would like to find a grant to exercise Fedora 4.   The group encourages us to weave Fedora4 into a grant -- letters of support from members of the Fedora development  community would be forthcoming.  Ideas were floated at DLF such as connecting Fedora4 to HSM to deal with large files,  or something with Curate or shared/ir or  video - as Fedora4 initiatives. Tom encouraged other ideas to be kicked around, esp. from North America & Europe as grant season begins.


  5. Follow-up on actions items and issues from last month's call
    1. Fedora 4 stuff, including authorization
      Tom: The Fedora 4 developers are currently meeting and are coding in a house in Austin.  We might look for a report as a follow on to this week's hacking session.  Tom thinks they are aware of the authorization needs from our perspective.

    2. DLF Update: geospatial, Curate, ArchivesSpace, general conference update

      Bess:  She attended a meeting in Boston at Tufts hosted by openGeo portal software and gave a presentation about the way they are managing GIS assets at Stanford, and work to develop a spatial plug-in for Blacklight that they are calling geo-blacklight.  It was well received.  They also gave a well attended presentation at DLF in Austin on the same subject -- Yale and UVA were on the same panel – they talked about data modeling with GIS and a lot of good response.   Bess will post some info online and to the list.

      Tom: Several people decided to go to DLF when they saw how Hydra-focused it was.  The Hydra Community showed its strength.  Bess: The Dive Into Hydra workshop was well attended and combined installfest with Hydra for managers.

      Rick: The DLF session on Curate was well received with a lot of great questions.   The presentation focused on the collaboration aspects and how do we handle mixed-media formats.  Their basic strategies were well received.  Robin R. and Mike G. presented along with him and offered insights on how the Hydra community worked together and where we were going.

    3. RDF in Hydra summit
      Tom: About a dozen people came and thrust of meeting was to define the problem space and articulate the questions.  For the first two days they weren't using terminology in the same way and this resulted in the production of a glossary which helped to clear this up.  There is now an RDF section on the wiki, and unpolished notes on Google docs. 

      Mike: one of the big take aways was the need for a new working group that can carry this thread through our meetings and talk about data modeling with RDF.  Two extremes of implementation are Penn State and UCSD, but we both see good things in each other's models and would like to find some way to bridge them that could be used more widely; folks at Oregon are looking for something similar.  He believes they will kick off a working group shortly.  This should also be a topic to explore in some depth at Hydra connect meeting in January.

      See the Hydra RDF Working Group page on the wiki for more details. 


  6. Progress on action items from September meeting
    1. Should we go over Summary of the action points as a group and assign dates/owners for the action items so we can better track progress?
      <Note taker: agenda item deferred>

  7. Standing Community TODOs
    1. Next Partner meetings
      1. January event: Worldwide Hydra Connect meeting.
        Richard: There will be an email describing the event soon and asking people to register their interest;  there will likely be a formal registration through eventbrite with a $40 cost.  He and Karen Cariani have started to draft the email, which should go out next week. 

        Tom:  Hydra Connect will be 4 days; first day: workshops and tutorials, 2nd and 3rd days: plenary with lightning talks and extended posters, 4th day: working groups. 

        Richard: Each partner may be asked to do a poster and to prepare a 24/7 about their heads. 

        Tom: also notion of getting several houses like through airbnb or similar, possibly clustered in the same area.  Meeting spaces will be at UCSD.  Maybe we need a mixture of houses and hotel rooms in case someone would have reimbursement issues with house.   

        Tom: there is a space on the wiki ( January 2014 Agenda and Notes) for working groups to be identified in advance. Already named:

        • Curate / SharedIR development
        • RDF & Hydra: models and tooling
        • Multimedia Solutions: Avalon, Hydra DAMS, et al.
        • Hydra on Fedora 4
        It would be great to get any other working groups named now so that rooms can be identified.

      2. 2014: regional Hydra event in UK/Ireland
        Chris: dates and arrangements for a Hydra Camp are being set for Spring 2014.

      3. LibConDevX / Partner meeting
        Tom: The Spring partner meeting will be at LibConDevX in April, the exact week not set but probably middle or second half of April.


    2. Training
      <no discussion>

    3. Strategic plan: where are we? are we on track?
      1. See: Progress against the 2013 Strategic Action Plan 

        Richard:  There is an outstanding 'to do' for the Steering Committee to tweak dates of the plan but it hasn't happened yet. 

        Tom: will Curate IR be the DSpace equivalent Hydra Head and is OR14  date for the second line correct.  Rick: falls in line with that respect but we'll have to figure out if OR14 is a stretch but still set a realistic date.

        Tom: Exhibits tool  (Omeka equivalent)  will be available by OR14; heavy development will begin in winter quarter of 2014

        Claire: Northwestern has a solution for Finding Aids but no cycles planned to make it replicable;  it would be good to hear from an institution who needs this functionality.

        Discussion ensued about the first row under Strategy 6 (demonstrated robust code-sharing and reuse across heads and sites), and the consensus was that we were further along and can place a star here.

        Richard: Strategy 7, 2nd point (updated and more polished articulation of its community principles), we can place a star here as well

  8. Prospective Partner Intel Sharing
    Several partners reported contacts from institutions interested in becoming Hydra adopters and/or partners.

    1. "Provisional Partnership"
      Tom: We have institutions who look and act like partners but are not partners and are missing out on important conversations, which is a detriment to them and to the community.  A new form of partnership -- proto or provisional, is being discussed by the Steering Committee.  These would be institutions that are well qualified with a strong interest and on their way to becoming partners.  They would be enrolled on the Partner list and encouraged to attend partner meetings, and over a 12 month process their status would be reviewed.  During that time they would not have a vote but would benefit from being included.  Some are institutions who would be partners if the MOU and legal process were more straight forward.  Claire: 'Provisional' not 'affiliate' probably better suggests it is leading somewhere.  Tom: The next step will be to float this idea to the full partners list. 


  9. Website Updates

    Richard: nothing to report.