OpenRefine ecosystem map

[magdmartin]

Issue created from this conversation https://github.com/OpenRefine/openrefine.org/pull/303#discussion_r1543522725. The diagram discussed is available on this branch: https://github.com/OpenRefine/openrefine.org/blob/ecosystem_page/src/pages/ecosystem.md

---

In this diagram I struggle a bit to understand what is a node and what is an edge. The type of concepts that go into nodes doesn't seem to be uniform to me. For instance there are nodes about:

• "user support" (an activity)
• "support forum" (an online space)
• "advisory committee" (a group of people)

Are those meant to always refer to a specific group of people? Maybe the phrasing of the nodes could be adapted to make that clearer ("translators" instead of "translation", and so on)

Then I have the same sort of problem with edges. What does an edge mean?

• "reports to"? (such as in "project manager" - "advisory committee")
• "is included in"? (such as in "reconciliation services" - "third-party developers")
• "communicates with"? (such as in "advisory committee" - "CS&S")

And then it's not clear to me why certain edges are there and others not. For instance, why is there an edge between "funding partners" and "advisory committee" but not between "funding partners" and "project manager"? Why an edge between "code of conduct committee" and "advisory committee"?

Also I have the feeling that the light blue box is meant to circle where the OpenRefine project starts and ends - but then do we need the central "OpenRefine project" node? Can't that be a label added to the box itself?

Originally posted by @wetneb in https://github.com/OpenRefine/openrefine.org/pull/303#discussion_r1564516933

[magdmartin]

I aimed to use the graph to provide a comprehensive overview of the project. This will help new members understand the different contributor groups and the scope of the project (who is responsible for what). The main goal is to keep it simple and easy to read for new community members, while also directing them to relevant resources if they want to learn more.

My goal is to include the following contributor types:

• Development team (including designer, developer, release manager.)
• Third-party developers
• Governance (with the Advisory Committee, Project Manager, and CS&S)
• Funders
• Relationship with our user community (support, documentation, translation) and highlighting the contributor doing training, advocacy, and support within their community. This is currently worded as is on the page Each community provides advocacy, training, and support activities via mediums relevant to its members, with little coordination between them.

An earlier, more complex version is available on the forum. Feedback at the time was that it was too detailed and not intelligible.