SDMWG - 2015-11-03 Meeting notes

Owned by Bill Branan
Jun 16, 2017
3 min read

Date

 - 4pm Eastern / 1pm Pacific

Conference Call Info

Attendees

Goals

  • Initial Working Group Meeting

Discussion items

Time Item Who Notes
5min Confirm facilitator, select note-taker, roll-call Steve
  • Facilitate:
  • Notes:
  • Roll-call: See above.
10min Review Sufia Documentation for Managers Working Group (SDMWG - "sdimwig") Steve
  • We discussed what we're seeking from 
    documentation.
  How we communicate Steve
  Objective 1: Define our audience for levels of documentation Steve
  • Defined two audience levels:
    • Administrators
    • Repository managers
  Objective 2: Review existing documentation to identify gaps in coverage Steve
  • Tabled this approach for now. Instead we're
    coming up with questions that administrators
    and repository managers might ask about Sufia
  Resources Steve
  • Not yet addressed
5min Confirm date and time of next call Steve
  • Next Tuesday, Nov. 10, at 4 PM Eastern / 1 PM
    Pacific

Action items

Meeting Notes

What is a manager? Who’s the audience?
  • Might be multiple levels of manager types that we want to hit with this documentation
  • Need to address: Who are we aiming this at? Can we reasonably be expected to create documentation for these kinds of people?
Steve suggests this approach:
  • Prioritize what we want to document
  • Draft that document
  • Recommend process for updating documentation
  • Share with community for review and discussion
We had tentatively decided that all of this should happen by the end of January 2016.
Suggestion from Mike: How to keep documentation up to date? Maybe after SDMWG is done, we can form a Sufia Documentation Interest Group and we can meet monthly or quarterly and we can revisit the documentation and update if it needs that.
Others who aren't in the Hangout today will likely wish to be involved in some way, too.
Re: audience question - at HydraConnect, heard some interesting things, got some good pointers from Heidi, technical writer, who encouraged more specificity
But we should also trust our instincts and not overthink it.
Steve: documentation could be useful at two levels:
  1. level at which his boss would be able to understand the documentation - could be a trifold pamphlet about Sufia (this is what Sufia is, how it relates to Hydra as a thing, what it can do for you); AND
  2. level of documentation to help someone like him who is pseudo-technical but needs to manage a repository and needs to know whether this is a suitable platform and what to expect out of the box, so to speak.
Mike: is it useful to protect the “trifold” audience (administrators), protect them from the detail that repository managers need to see?
Group thinks this is a good approach - separate documentation for admins (something would help with decision making).
Examples of providing levels of documentation are  http://iiif.io/ and  http://hydrainabox.projecthydra.org/. There are aspects of these that would be good for the administrator audience, and aspects that would work for the repository manager audience.
Can start by listing for each of those two audiences what questions we want to answer.
For decision maker, this list may not be too long - see  Sufia Docs for Managers (Google doc)
Our process: answer the questions, then share via wiki for community to respond to.
We’ll try to get through all the questions by next Tuesday’s hangout (Nov. 10).
Wherever we’re not certain about answers to the questions, we should have some disclaimer - i.e., this isn’t blessed from on high, it’s a living document. What we’re arriving at is the best collective understanding of Sufia at the moment.