"Data for History helps historians to find useful datasets, add value to them, and share their enhanced data with the community."
I like the idea of a vision statement and the statement proposed by Richard. I'd like to add to the vision that one of the long-term goals is to identify reasoning patterns in historical discourse that can use some form of computer-based support.
Your point about identifying reasoning patterns that can use computer-based support might also be part of a more detailed explanation of what we are about.
This sort of detail could go into an updated Mission Statement.
I think this is a very good idea. To reflect this further, I have the impression, that what is being "unpacked" under "add value" at the moment is somewhat contingent. Could we identify something like "axes" of value-adding there? E.g. some of the activities seem to go towards tooling (surveying, collecting, commenting and demonstrating tools, but also developing our own tools where there is a lack of one), whereas others go towards conceptualizing (extending CIDOC CRM, finding common ground for prosopographic or geographic projects), and still others go towards organization of research and publication processes (best practices, guidelines, reviews).
I agree that this is something that would best come as part of the more detailed explanation and not immediately upfront. But it (or something comparable) could help in giving this detailed explanation more structure.
I agree, and think this more considered analysis will have two benefits. First, it will allow us to state, clearly and specifically, the benefits that we plan to bring to the historical research community (mission statement). Second, and following on from that, it will clarify how we need to organise ourselves in order to achieve our goals.