1
|
- Overlaps and complements
- October 25 2004
- DLF Forum Baltimore
|
2
|
- Surface high-quality online scholarly collections of DLF institutions
- Focus on interoperability, collaboration
- Commit to action, share resources
- Develop an applied research agenda
|
3
|
- Humanities data are not developed by the scholars, but out of experience
(performances, books, films, recordings, etc.)
- Humanists find meaning in the record of human behavior and activity
- IT doesn’t change the purpose of their work as it does in the sciences
- Problem of credit for collaborative, non-traditional research needs to
be worked out within the disciplines
- One potential breakthrough : collaboration tools for use of content
|
4
|
- General public (not humanities scholars) is driving transformation to
provide greater access to digital humanities information
- “That which is not digitized will soon not be found or used” (n.b.,
libraries, archives, museums)
- Difficult to build a tractable business model for digitization of
humanities materials (current user domain can often be an N of 1, but
potential use is difficult to predict)
- Encumbrances to data access (copyright, privacy issues) a significant
impediment to humanities & social science scholarship and
instruction
|
5
|
- Need tools for collection aggregation, content analysis, collaboration
- Use environments and infrastructure that enable “trusted” use of
copyrighted content (Sakai, Shibboleth)
- Keep digitizing!!!
- Libraries are supply side, users demand side; will similar tools sets
help both groups?
- Simplify metadata schemes and requirements, but not everywhere (best
practices, mapping, automatic metadata generation and enrichment)
- Simplify discovery and access entry points (OAI)
- Enable our content to surface in many environments (Sakai, Google, etc.)
- Enable export from the back-end
of portals
- Enable persistent identification of digital content
|
6
|
- Surface your collections
- How are you prepared to contribute?
- Metadata: embrace OAI/DLF best practices
- Increasingly prescriptive pref’s & standards
- Everything, pref. MODS, MARC-XML
- Sets and set descriptions
- Coverage and date
- Validation and analysis of metadata (3rd party)
|
7
|
- Develop Tools registry
- Track tool development for using content across domains (e.g, IMS)
- Metadata harvesting, normalization, enrichment:
- Standards and best practices for data providers and service providers
implementing OAI
- Develop methods to work with canonical metadata formats
- Web services that focus on metadata normalization
- Language transformation tools
- IMS course management : extracting and using metadata, content, and
repositing the content
|
8
|
- Develop for scholars?
- Let them build their own?
- Work collaboratively with them
- Library tools may be useful for scholars too
|
9
|
- Tools for enrichment, mining of metadata
- Taxonomies and automatic selection
- Learn from work in other environments
- How to leverage rich traditional vocabulary work with current tool
development?
- Tools for automatic metadata creation
|
10
|
- Use
- Collections
- Tools
- Registries
|