RePosit Skype conference call no. 5
28 February 2011, 10.00am–11.20am

Present: Lizzie Dipple (Symplectic), Rachel Proudfoot (Leeds), Nicola Cockarill (Plymouth), Richard Jones (Symplectic), Sarah Molloy (QMUL).

Apologies: Ellie James (Keele), Ian Tilsed (Exeter), Jill Evans (Exeter), Bo Middleton (Leeds), Jodie Double (Leeds).

Chair: Lizzie Dipple

Minutes: Lizzie Dipple

Agenda
1. Postcard designs

2. Survey

3. Blog posts

4. Action points

5. RSP dissemination event

6. AOB

1. Postcard designs

LD – This needs finalising so we can move on. Can we pick one design and go for it?

RP – Why don’t we use different ones? Let’s get so far, draw a line and then pick at that point. At Leeds we’ll work further on whatever we pick anyway to make it suitable for use at Leeds. It’s also worthwhile sharing the designs we rejected and why.

RJ – I agree. The outputs can include the building blocks of how we came to them. Let’s make our source files available, because we’ll never get everything correct for everyone. The files would presumably be provided in Quark or In-design.

LD – What about the cost of images?

RJ – Let’s decide on our budget and buy as many as we can.

LD – The advocacy budget is £800/HEI minus what Ellie spent getting one design made up at Keele. So would each HEI be willing to lose up to another £100 for this?

SM – I’ll ask Creative Services to cost the images for postcard and poster-sized use.

RJ – From a quick look online it seems they might be in the region of £100 per image.

LD – Let’s pick our preference list then.

SM/NC/RJ – Our top choice is the close-up of the peacock feathers.

LD – Mine too, with the full peacock image for a poster.

SM – Same here.

LD – And your next favourite?

RP – I like the lock and key. Also the spotlight on ‘research’, if it could be done better.

LD – So we’ll ask the designer to make the letters less jumbly, and remove the first (extra) word ‘research’. Does anyone have an issue with removing all logos from the front (as discussed by email earlier)?

RP/SM – No, that’s fine.

LD – And did we have a consensus on the number blocks being too patronising?

RJ – How about having lines, like old BASIC programming language: 10, 20, 30...?

RP – Sorry, that’s too nerdy. Since we’ve got nothing in competition, let’s just go with the number blocks.

LD – And on the postcard reverse, we need to move the ‘be seen, be read, create impact’ to the top.

NC – There are the two versions: ‘reveal’ and ‘share’.

SM – Each goes with a different strapline.

LD – I think everyone preferred the sans serif font, but that ‘login, upload, etc’ should be in bold. How about the click arrows: should they go?

SM – I don’t think we need the arrows.

NC – Yes, it’s better without.

RP – So we take them off; they’re not needed.

LD – And do we use the ‘spotlight’ strapline for both the spotlight image and the lock image?

SM – That’s what I’ve got.

RP – I want to make sure we’ll be OK with the re-use requirements form JISC as regards buying in images.

LD – We need to be clear with Creative Services about needing a Creative Commons licence.

NC – What about using a sans serif font on the front as well as the back, for consistency?

LD – Yes.

SM – I’ll sort all this out.

LD – Is it OK that the JISC logo is in black and white not orange?

SM – The designer followed the JISC instructions provided. Regarding licences, I think the Creative Commons attribution depends on how much scope is needed for altering images. And then, do you want me to get the designer working on the poster next?

LD – Yes.

SM – The poster has screenshots, so I’ll go back to the Leeds notes to make sure of what’s required.

2. Survey

LD – I’ve heard from Ellie, and she cannot trial the core questions until she’s done enough advocacy to have people using the system. Can anyone else help sooner than that?

RP – I’m sure we can find some people at Leeds.

LD – And how is everyone getting on with the site-specific questions?

NC – I know what I want to say.

LD – So it seems we should just set a deadline for those. There’s my questions document in Google docs which pulls together the core questions plus what everyone said separately about their site-specific questions so you have ideas sharing. BOS seem like they might be making a mountain out of a molehill regarding the joint survey.

RP – Yes, I want to get the fuller picture from them. Plan A is BOS doing the survey sharing for us; plan B is exporting our separate results and us collating them together ourselves.

LD – Can you send them my core questions document? And then say there would be some more (say 10 to 12) site-specific questions.

RP – Yes. It would be good if BOS could do the work for us.

LD – Is there any chance you could talk to BOS and also test out the core questions in the next week or two?

RP – I’ll try.

LD – If we could aim to get the survey ready for three weeks’ time, that would be great (although that only leaves one week for the upload of questions to BOS).

3. Blog posts

LD – We’ve got several written now.

RJ – I’ve been working on the training guide and user community stuff. There have been 22 responses to invitations to the expert user group so far. I’ll put the group together on Wednesday/Thursday and then write the blog post after that.

LD – On that topic, can you remind us how to do discussions in the Google group?

RJ – You simply email your message to reposit@googlegroups.com and it appears in the Google group discussion forum as well as being emailed directly to everyone in the group. It would be nice to have a bit of content in there. How about I get everyone joined up there this week, then put together a list of discussion issues for next week, to post each one a day or so apart?

LD – Sounds good.

RJ – I’ll write a project admin email that lists who can send which message and when.

LD – I’ll that in Richard’s capable hands then.

4. Action points

LD – Let’s go through the action points from Leeds. Can I remind everyone that Jodie scanned the feedback forms, so let’s use that feedback when creating your presentations, rather than wasting it. We’ve discussed BOS contacts, but I need to check whether Ellie replied about that.

RJ – The how-to guide does exist for Repository Tools, but it’s in the 3.5 documentation (admin guide). I’ve asked Sian to update it and I’ve seen a draft. Since then, I created a presentation I trialled at Cambridge, which I’ve convert to higher resolution images once I’ve done the user community work.

LD – How about the real-life presentations?

NC – I was bumped off the agenda at my first meeting; now I’ve got an appointment with the PVC. The next big meeting is in May.

SM – Both Nicola and I took our presentations to teh RSP winter school for comment, but I haven’t started my real-life presentations. My first demo is for research support services, so I’m drawing up a new set of slides aimed at a different group. Using the template is simple. We’ve opened a new postgrad reading room in the library, so I’m going to nobble people there.

LD – QMUL and Keele have live systems, so the spotlight is currently on you for actual follow up on advocacy plans.

SM – My strategy has made it into the main library services strategy and research strategy for the next five years, so I really do have to follow through.

LD – Has anyone got anything for the cribsheet we talked about?

NC – I’ve made a start on that. I’m being asked a variety of questions on a broad range of issues. I’m testing things out with the PVC as well.

LD – Can you share your cribsheet on Google docs as the basis for a joint one?

NC – No problem, that’s my homework. Also, talking about the training issues log, I’m sure I’ll have lots of points to add.

5. RSP dissemination event

LD – I’ll check with Bo about the survey and money situation. Regarding RSP running a joint event with us, I wondered how big our role could be, since we officially said we’d have a RePosit dissemination event?

RP – That’s negotiable.

NC – RSP doing the organising might be a better use of their/our time.

RP – Could we part-sponsor the event, putting in money from our dissemination event budget? As well as our presentation slot, could we tie in the event with the wider development of community?

LD – That way it becomes about the part of RePosit that lives on after the project timeline.

SM – Sorry, I’ve got to go.

LD – Rachel, are you able to continue the dialogue with RSP for now, although others will need to take over more of the work for the event? That can’t all rest with you, it’s not fair.

RP – I need to go back to them with an optimal date.

LD – How about early June? But we should check the dates for ARMA and OR11 in June.

RJ – The end of May might be better, since OAI7 is also in mid June

LD – Ellie has a 75-minute slot at ARMA.

6. AOB

LD – Once more, I just want to remind everyone about keeping track of advocacy/training events and attendees. I’ll now try to get the minutes written up as swiftly as possible. Thanks to everyone. Oh, and the presentation I worked on for Ian to present to JISC tomorrow is in Google docs if you want to look at it.

Summary of Action Points