i find it ironic that here i am, researching how people choose names for files and folders, and struggling with what to call the category of systems i am studying. i’ve tried out quite a few:
online repository
shared archive
group information management system
shared file repository
shared repository
shared information space (courtesy of “Let’s Shack Up: Getting Serious about GIM“)
group information repository
i want something that isn’t too clunky, and doesn’t mean radically different things to different audiences. i hesitate to use the word “collaborative” because i feel like that word often has a “synchronous” connotation, and i feel like most behaviors with respect to these particular systems are asynchronous.
i’ve been using shared repository, but i’m leaning toward switching to group information repository because i feel like that might make more sense to people to whom i will be presenting my dissertation. i also like shared information space, but i feel like the word “space” might be too vague, and besides, i use it in my definition:
a group information repository is an online space used by a workgroup for storing and organizing shared documents and other files.
does it work? any other ideas?
I like it, em. I think “group” is an essential element for what you’re doing (introduces ideas of norms, practices, culture), and is, indeed, better than collaborative. I am wondering about “repository” because it may suggest a one-way action- I think institutional repositories struggle with this label for that reason. You might talk to Soo, Beth and Beth about whether they have bumped up against this in their IR work. But I think you’re right, it is much better than space, and then when you use it with “group” it pulls back on the notion of a static e entity and suggests ongoing use moreso. :-)