NDSA:December 21, 2015 Standards and Practices Working Group Notes

Participants

• Andrea Goethals (notes)
• Amy Kirchoff
• Bethany Nowviskie
• Carol Kussman
• Erin Engle
• Felicity Dykas
• Jenny Mullins
• John Spencer
• Karen Cariani
• Kate Murray
• Meg Phillips
• Michelle Paolillo
• Oliver Bendorf
• Winston Atkins

Meet Those New to the Group

• Bethany Nowviskie, Director of DLF since April 2015
• Oliver Bendorf, Program Associate, DLF since August 2015

Update on the NDSA Transition to DLF Hosting (Bethany, Oliver, Erin)

• Independent NDSA website in development - will launch in January 2016
• Listserv in transition - will launch in January 2016
• Working group calls will use DLF's uber conference account - will be set up by January 2016
• DLF has started planning for the annual NDSA meeting which will be hooked onto the DLF forum in early November 2016
• The wiki is being transitioned over - should be ready the first week of January 2016 - will have the same look and feel

Report out on the CNI Panel Discussion (NDSA on the Move, Bethany and Oliver)

• Summary of the panel
  • Representatives from the Coordinating Committee (Micah, Robin, Abby) talked about why DLF was chosen
  • Bethany and Oliver from DLF talked about why they answered the call
• Summary of the feedback at CNI:
  • A terrain map of how DLF, CLIR, NDSA and others fit together is needed
  • People want ot know how to get more involved with the NDSA WGs
  • People have preferred the practical NDSA products over the theoretical

Discussion of Standards and Practices WG for Feedback for DLF

• What WG things have you liked?
  • Several people said the Levels of Preservation and Fixity report
  • Knowing that we all have the same issues
  • Cross-WG activities
  • Collaborative nature of the group
  • Want to continue to try to collaborate with commercial companies
• Any feedback on the monthly calls? Should they be monthly or scheduled as needed to work on projects?
  • Several people said that they liked having monthly calls. One reason given is that it provides a beneficial pressure to get things done.
  • Several liked the showcases (e.g. speakers on video, digital art, email)
  • A couple people thought the WG would benefit from adding agenda planning meetings a few times a year to brainstorm topics, which would also take some of the burden off the co-chairs
  • We have occasionally had 'what are you working on' calls when we did not have agendas but we could make this a more programmatic part of the WG agenda. These calls also lead to us hearing from those that don't always speak up
  • Would like to introduce icebreaker calls periodically to the WG, e.g. what is currently keeping you up at night?
• What did not work?
  • When we have had sub-groups (e.g. for video or email) it is too hard to participate in the discussion (yet another list to follow) - these should come back together with the main WG
  • Some of our projects have been too large, or too small (nothing produced from them). The medium-sized projects have worked well for the WG but it may not be possible to predict this in advance.
  • There is value in the conversation even if nothing is produced from it
• What do people think about the Coordinating Committee's idea to recast the WGs as interest groups?
  • One person said that interest groups might be good - this person said she has lost sight of what this WG does

Wrap-up

• Reminder that there is a call for new co-chairs. Please contact Erin, Kate or Andrea if you are interested or want to nominate someone (with their consent).
• Next call TBD