Eileen: Very interested in seeing next itteration of a plan and sharing this with her society collegues to see how much interest there may be in producing material in other languages.

Dennis: WACC is likely to be interested. World Council is very interested in producing material, but may be wary of putting its name in the masthead. Many producers in the South may need a vehicle to get payment to those producers of material that need to be paid for their work. Note, though, that this project is not set up to sell material though it may make new facilities for such sale possible.

Paul: Would like to stay involved, especially in software development track. Notes that he has a programmer in PR through November along with some small monetary resource. Should we be sharing this development resource? Or at least having this developer and a developer on our site communicate together? Does the software we adopt and customize become, itself, something we can share?

Tito: Very interested in continuing, but our global partners are not at the table. How would this conversation have been shifted with the input of others around the world? We can't define for others around the world what we think they need, we must promote a closer collaboration. Dennis notes we have a standing invitation to Buenos Aires and San Paulo to continue this conversation and that some of the development we have been discussing may be more affordable in Latin America than here. Mary notes that she intends to use some of the remaining funds in her current grant to ensure that some of this broader input gets into the process. Tito offers to discuss this site with the nine deans of the GTU.

John: If you are talking about a site that shares religious resources, that is something the Catholic Academy would likely be interested in. St. Anthony Press also likely to be interested. Also willing to review RFPs. Notes that this site could be a clearinghouse of material that publisher do want to share with their communities.

Adán: Interested in maintanining involvement and thinks the funding agency would be very interested in continuing.

Jeff: Willing to continue involvement, bring this to his own department and to the national organizations he works in. Also willing to review RFPs.

The discussion has generally supported an openness to other faiths. This may make some contributors uncomfortable. We want each faith to share among themselves their own best religious resources. Founded on mutual respect.

We must recall that other religious traditions are actually different and might not allow for the kind of sharing that we foster. We go back to the principal of asking "where is the energy" and seeking out those traditions that nourish that energy are welcome.

Our stance in favor of open source religious resources will challenge the community hard enough on the open source front. It is likely that the open source nature of the site will keep away some of the less tolerant segments of society.

When we translate to other languages the actual words or meaning of words may change and mean something a bit different.

Do we mean religious or spiritual? Lets reclaim the term "religious," granting that this may make some of the more individualistic spiritual shy away from the site.

Do we need an editorial board? Lets shy away from that. Lets foster a community. Leave that kind of authenticating to publishers. Return to the principal of "work of the people".

Lets not overplan it with structure and membership and such. Allow it to grow fluidly.

Might someone want to study project this as a PhD thesis?

First of all I would like to congratulate everybody in this meeting for the interest demonstrated in such a project. Unfortunately I will not be able to be with you, but I am praying for God to bless you with His wisdom so we can face such a challenge in the best possible ways.

As to the project itself, let me share with you a few considerations:

1) In understand the project as rare opportunity to share liturgical content from all over the world. As such, I understand that the website should be in as many languages as possible. I am quite sure that we can find Christians around the world to do such a job voluntarily.

2) I see the website running as a digital library. Therefore, we will need to follow the international standards for cataloguing multimedia material.

3) The infrastructure, technical and executive team could be based somewhere in the South. Such an option is likely to reduce the costs.

4) The space could also be a meeting point for researchers on liturgy from all over the world. Already in this meeting we have a couple of folks from different universities.

5) As to the editorial line, I truly believe in a free open space with users review. However I must also understand and respect the institutional positions. This should be a tough issue, but let us not make it something that could undermine the project.

That is what I have to say so far. I hope you have a good meeting.

Blessings,

Fabio Josgrilberg

http://www.metaphorai.pro.br

fabio.josgrlberg (at) metodista.br

We've now broken for lunch, we will be starting up again at 1:30 pm (CST).

This discussion included some thoughts on the roles of publishers and the resistance to the publishing enterprise. We are saying that human knowledge is not, finally, a commodity.

To what degree will this be a site that facilitates a conversation in addition to static content?

Can we signal in the story that we have a community that values this flow and sharing? We will have to start with something. We have some concrete communities that need this, can we pull together the content and embody it in this new space. The effort is already underway.

We intend to create a community in which there is mutual respect, but we won't eliminate all fears and tensions from the site or the community. We can be a place where all voices can speak up and be heard. We have to understand that we are talking about power, this wide open space may be threatening to some, all may make contributions.

Could we combine the resource we are creating with a series of workshops that help folks (especially in communities like the Latino community) combine the heart with these materials and what we can do with it. This echos the notion of apprenticeship and the accompaniment that model implies.

Think about levels of access. Think about bridges between these technologies (mp3 to radio). Think about supporting meaning making. Think about presenting an alternative media representation with a more global view (note IndyMedia).

Think about how distributing our bits of connections to the divine (songs, pictures, stories) across borders can loose the content from its roots and context. Do we need to develop and code of ethics of sorts to help recover and maintain these contexts? (note Consuming Religion)

Priamary Goal: We want a vivid description of what this project will be. In preparation for an RFP.

Secondary Goal: Begin the community-building process.

Participants in today's meeting introduced themselves to one another.