• Start recording
• Welcome & antitrust notice
• Introduction of new members
• Agenda review

• Antitrust Policy Notice: Attendees are reminded to adhere to the meeting agenda and not participate in activities prohibited under antitrust and competition laws. Only members of ToIP who have signed the necessary agreements are permitted to participate in this activity beyond an observer role.
• New Members:

Any news and updates of general interest to CTWG members

• -

• ACTION: Drummond Reed and other volunteers to complete the "backfill" work of terms from the GSWG specifications that should be in the ToIP Core Glossary.
• ACTION: CHAIRS to recruit one or more volunteers to complete the full V1 draft of the CTWG User Guide.
• ACTION: Drummond Reed to put the ToIP Term Tool V2 topic on the agenda for the next meeting.

Last Thursday Rieks posted this Slack message. He agreed to make it the main topic for discussion on today's call:

@Drummond Reed @Daniel Hardman As I was looking into the user guide topic, I felt a bit confused, which I think originates from the level of (dis)organization of the 3 CTWG-related repos, their purposes (if specified), and their contents. I think we should discard what we no longer need.  What I think we do need is the following:

• a template-repo that curators can instantiate and subsequently use to maintain the part of the Corpus that they curate. In my thinking, every Scope would be maintained in one repo (a Terms Repo), that is structured according to conventions that allow the stuff therein to be referenced and used across Term-Repo's = nicely 'decentralized'. Curators will use (predefined or self-defined) actions to construct their CI-pipeline for ingesting stuff; there SHOULD be a predefined action that can test the repo for structure etc. and that must succeed for a pull request to be merged.
• a template-repo, instances of which will be used by terms communities for creating ingestible stuff. The template with wiki-pages could serve this purpose. On the long run, we could have different "flavors"
• one repo in which CTWG maintains its documentation, which should include texts that document:
  • what CTWG does, and what not
  • the mental model(s) we use
  • how people can contribute to the ingestion phase
  • how curators can add ingestibles to the corpus
  • what artifacts (e.g. glossaries, dictionaries, ...) can be generated, and what curators should do to configure the specific kind of artifact they want to end up with.

I would like to discuss this and establish consensus on the (more detailed) way forward, of which I hope the result will be that CTWG and eSSIF-Lab ways of working will grow towards one another, which makes life easier for me.

• Review decisions/action items
• Planning for next meeting