Attendees:

Julie Rudder

Karen Cariani

Agenda

Review Tom's email specifically the following questions:

Which if any of the other sites are worth emulating?

No one in the group felt any sites were to be emulated as a whole. When we begin developing the architecture or components of the new Hydra site and wiki, there are definitely places to look for inspiration on specific things like: Fedora's Wiki technical organization and documentation. It would be good for others in the group to weigh in on specifics like this. Any other components to specifically call out?

Which of the personas listed are primary vs. secondary, and which are worth developing more fully

- Karen and Julie updated the Audiences and Information Needs table
  - this should be reviewed by the rest of the group.
- Questions remain
  - Consider adding Sys Admin - is this different enough?

2. Document key messages from email trail.

Key messages for Hydra can be boiled down to:

- Hydra is a "solution" for managing digital assets that is widely adopted, multipurpose, rich and rewarding to work with
  - and we welcome new adopters
- Hydra is a robust, open source community
  - and we welcome new contributors

The Hydra Web Presence should:

- Accurately and compellingly describe Hydra's features, benefits and values
- Reflect our desire to foster adoption & uptake
- Foster contributions & participation in the community
- Help the community to run smoothly and produce high-functioning products/solutions.

3. Next steps

Personas - target completion by mid April

- Develop persona questions (in progress)
- Conduct interviews
- Develop personas

Progress report to Steering Group?

- Would the steering group want to review the Audiences and Information Needs and the Key Messages?

More thinking topics:

- How does the website contribute to/intersect with the 8 key strategies defines by the Steering Group?
- Do we have google analytics on our current website?

Browser not supported