Notes

Outline

Planning for digitization in Minnesota August 2001 Nancy Allen, University of Denver, and The Bishoff Group

Why should cultural heritage institutions collaborate? Libraries, archives, museums are the memory organizations of a society. They organize the cultural and intellectual record of a society They contain the memory of peoples, communities, institutions and individuals, the scientific and cultural heritage, and the products throughout time of our imagination, craft and learning

Why Collaborate? Cultural Heritage Institutions hold our legacy to future generations They are an important part of the civic fabric, woven into people’s working and imaginative lives and into the public identity of communities. They are social assembly places, whose use and civic presence acknowledges their significance and social value.

Cultural heritage institutions in the digital age can….. Explore ways to provide learning, research and cultural opportunities for visitors Identify and grow new communities of users Develop strategies to manage digital collections Developing strategies for development and preservation of digital objects Identify common issues and goals that can be resolved together

Libraries, Museums, Archives:  Common goals Increase the value of our scientific, industrial and cultural heritage for new and creative uses Engage with cultural identities and aspirations of community and its people

Libraries, Museums, Archives:  Common goals Develop practices appropriate to values and purpose of the institution in the digital environment Explore what it means to develop a virtual civic presence. Explore sustainable economic model to support development and equitable access to cultural heritage.

What can a project do for these organizations? Increase the demand for primary source materials Help people find and use resources Increase use of “hidden” treasures Integrate disparate collections Enhance the digital library/museum Support distance/lifelong learning Support K-12 standards

So, what’s the problem? Libraries share nearly all collections Museums show only a small portion Libraries have catalogs for public access Museum inventory systems are for staff use only. Librarians don’t interpret collections, leaving that for patrons Museums provide interpretive exhibits.

Challenges of collaboration Rapidly changing technological environment The web brings changes in user expectations. The web offers the possibility of change for libraries and museums in the ways of doing business

Challenges of collaboration Lack of common terminology Competitive environment Agree to business models that grow institutions’ roles in networked environment yet sustain the physical entity

Tour of Digitization Models Colorado Digitization Project Online Archive of California—Finding Aids Five Colleges Virtually Missouri: first steps North Carolina ECHO Washington State

Models for collaboration Nancy Bolt, Colorado State Librarian, identified these models: Content Models: Members only or open to any Governance Models: Collaborative, or with a Lead Agency and partners

Models for Content From Nancy Bolt’s Presentation Members Only Florida Memory Project Florida Heritage Project Alaska’s Gold Wisconsin Texas Open to others Virtually Missouri North Carolina California DL SAILS (Mass) Washington State CDP

Models for Governance From Nancy Bolt’s presentation Collaborative Missouri North Carolina Wisconsin Colorado Lead Agency CDL Alaska Florida projects Washington State

Colorado Digitization Project Vision:  Create a virtual collection of digital objects representing the special collections and unique resources of Colorado’s archives, historical societies, libraries and museums Strategy: create infrastructure, enabling everyone to participate

Colorado Digitization Project The Infrastructure: http://coloradodigital.coalliance.org/ HERITAGE Training 5 regional scanning sites

Colorado Digitization Project Results: 450,000 hits in 20 mos. 50+ countries 6 multi-type working groups; steering committee 30+ projects, 48 institutions: more than half are museums/historical societies Funding:  LSTA, IMLS, Regional Systems; State Historic Fund

California Digital Library http://www.cdlib.org

Online Archive of California Collection of EADs No cross-collection searching Virtual Archives present EADs grouped by topic

Online Archive of California

Five Colleges Digital Access http://clio.fivecolleges.edu

Five Colleges Provides a search engine across collections Searches words in web pages based on EADs

Virtually Missouri: www.virtuallymissouri.org Online inventory form to encourage participation

North Carolina ECHO http://www.ncecho.org

North Carolina ECHO Searchable database of collection descriptions Provides links Search on “slavery”

Washington State: http://digitalwa.statelib.wa.gov/ Now shows a list of linked collections Includes public and university libraries Demonstrating a cross-collection search using “Content” within one institution.

Other collaboratives The Library of Virginia www.lva.lib.va.us/dlp Digital Library of Georgia http://neptune.libs.uga.edu/cgi-bin/door/homepage.cgi Kentucky Virtual Library http://www.kyvl.org/

Success Elements for Collaboratives Start with everyone at the table Agree on markets in common Risk taking with flexibility Understand that the organizations have common goal, but different missions, organizational cultures, funding structures Creative problem solving

Success elements Working groups—strong mix of volunteers Strong leadership across types of institutions Analysis of different approaches to solve same problem Library willingness to adopt museum approaches Museum willingness to adopt library approaches

What worked        What didn’t Being open to different ways of doing things Recognizing what libraries and museums have in common Working together on solutions that work for all Being too committed to one course of action Failing to recognize knowledge gaps among partners Not thinking enough about potential problems

What worked        What didn’t Respect Collegiality – based conversations New solutions that represent hybrids between museums and libraries Technology-based communication Prescriptions Too many assumptions without discussion. Forgetting to talk about project users. Not enough face to face communication to start things off.

How do you identify resources to digitize? Primary source materials are widely distributed Many aren’t cataloged/inventoried Surveys Comprehensive Selective

How do you increase access? Current web access environment is incomplete, unpredictable, and difficult for the public to use Impossible to know what site to go to Exhibit/gallery approach with no metadata Database approach with no web search access Exhibits imbedded 6-7 layers down

Metadata Metadata—Data about data Provides the user with identification tool, describing the digital or physical object Metadata can be Catalog record Finding aid Registrar record Inventory system

How do you increase access Mixed metadata standards environment Libraries—Strong history of national standards among libraries Archives—Emerging standards supporting resources organized in collections Museums—Some subject area standards exist, across museums, little standardization Historical Societies—Frequently have archive, museum and library using standards in each area.

Metadata and collaboratives Again: Start with everyone at the table Seek agreement on one standard for description, thesauri If not, Find a common set of elements Determine an acceptable set of thesauri/subject lists Consider classification to overcome differences in terminology

Metadata standards MARC and AACR-2 XML and Dublin Core Encoded Archival Description Text Encoding Initiative RLG’s REACH elements for museums Visual Resource Association GILS

Subject access—subject lists and thesauri Standard subject heading lists—LCSH, MeSH, Sears, Chenhall’s AASLH nomenclature Standard thesauri—Art & Architecture Thesaurus (Getty), Thesaurus of Graphic Material Taxonomy—heavily used in scientific fields Local terms—smaller organizations will develop own list; Geographic and subject terms for Minnesota

Scan standards/best practices Besser Principles Scan once, preservation is by-product of scanning for access Scan at the highest resolution appropriate for item Create and store a master image file that can be used for derivative files for a variety of current & future uses :  thumbnail, access, etc.

Scan Standards/best practices Besser Principles continued Use image file formats and compression conforming to industry standards Use non-proprietary formats and system components Have backup and storage strategy Find a migration strategy for long term preservation of digital resources

Scan standards/best practices Audio and Video standards are still developing Photographic, map, text standards are solidifying Adopting minimum standards; emphasize need to adjust to item, audience, use

Challenges for collaboratives Copyright and Intellectual Property issues Different missions, revenue sources Limited knowledge about digitization Standards are and evolving Few choices for software to support new standards

Challenges for collaboratives Tendency to base scanning on a short-term view of digital access Poor preparation of collections Creating the Union Catalog—the search for interoperability Creating something that will last Funding

Legal issues Copyright vs. ownership Deed of gift Intellectual property rights Special issues Photographers Music Privacy NAGPRA Sharing resources

Funding: What are the options Corporate grants Foundation grants Federal funds Private donations

Corporate gifts and grants In-kind gifts of equipment Gifts from the corporation (usually for public relations, or via the PR office) Gifts from the corporate foundation

Foundation gifts Large foundations listed in national or regional directories Research the foundation’s interests Cultivate foundation officers Explore interest prior to application cycle Family foundations

Federal funds Institute of Museum and Library Services http://www.imls.gov/ National Science Foundation http://www.nsf.gov/ National Endowment for the Arts http://www.nea.gov/ National Endowment for the Humanities http://www.neh.gov/

Slide 49

Slide 50

Slide 51

Slide 52

Digitization in Minnesota Museums………….Libraries Weisman Art Museum (U of Minnesota) E-Museum, Minnesota State University /Mankato Walker Art Minneapolis Institute of Arts Science Museum of Minnesota Hubert Humphrey Museum Minnesota Historical Society and linked sites Minnesota Museum of American Art University of Minnesota University of Minnesota Law Library Minnesota State/Mankato Library’s special collections Minnesota State/Moorhead Archives Minneapolis Public Library Carleton College Library University of St. Thomas Archives/Special Coll.

U of MN:  Images

Special issues for Minnesota Special benefits of collaboration Shared values Barriers to collaboration Development of standards Agreement on interoperability approach Funding