Europeana

What I appreciated most about Katy's Europeana presentation is that it acknowledged the political motivation that can drive digital library development. Much of our class content has focused on technology, formats, specifications, etc., for good reason, but I think it's equally important to always keep in mind that any collection of material, digital or analog, entails a process of selection and interpretation. "Information" does not exist in a neutral vacuum; as information professionals, it's our job to maintain and disseminate an awareness of exactly this circumstance. As Americans, we likely have a tendency to see Google and its various projects outside of a national context and it was very interesting to consider the Europeana project as an interruption to this mentality. It is a very real and concrete effort to build a counter to Google and to an Americanized web.

The history of the project raises a very compelling set of questions, regarding the way we can consider concepts like "the future geography of knowledge." I don't think that anxiety over preservation and access to information is anything new in libraries, but the ability to digitize changes our sense of what we can control, what feels like chaos, and what we are afraid of losing to more talented internet denizens.

Information is political. Even despite our pronouncements that we are in an internet-facilitated global age with few barriers remaining, the story of the Europeana project reminds us that we may sometimes take this view precisely because we are Americans and we are privileged in our ability to access and disseminate information. In reality, this circumstance is not yet a global constant. In short, the political framework is essential and I'm very appreciative that Katy included it in her presentation.

Semantic Web

Marianna's presentation on the Semantic Web was among my favorites of the semester. Reese & Banerjee touch briefly upon the concept in their chapter on metadata formats, as well as in a few other places in the book, and provide good, concise explanations. But Marianna's powerpoint presentation will be useful as a detailed source of clear definitions and visual interpretations of the Semantic Web.

Specifically, the presentation is noteworthy for the inclusion of several slides detailing the components of a Social Semantic Web. Taking into account the increasingly social nature of the internet, the idea of a Social Semantic Web is critical. Among the range of ontologies that any manifestation of a semantic web would need to link are the user-generated folksonomies. Most ontologies, whether or not of library-related origin, are dynamic systems, constantly in formation. I like that Marianna's presentation directly addresses this reality, rather than assuming a scenario in which static semantic links can be drawn and established indefinitely.

Archivists' Toolkit

Sibyl Roud's presentation on the Archivists' Toolkit was highly useful and educational. In spite of its description as a data management system that is "for archivists by archivists," I found many of its features to be applicable in a wider context. These include the compatibility with multiple metadata formats, the attention to rights management issues, and the well-designed, intuitive interface. While some of the terminology in the version that Sibyl showed us is clearly archives-specific, much of the functionality could easily apply to digital repositories that are not necessarily proper archives.

What I find most compelling about the Archivists' Toolkit is its significance in terms of open source systems. It can conceivably make archives processing work into a more efficient and affordable operation for a wide variety of institutions, collections, and organizations, even as it promotes data standardization online, among other benefits. Repository developers and managers outside of the archives community can potentially learn a lot from this type of project. As an open source initiative, it is truly admirable in scope and value.

Week 7: KML Files

We covered geotagging in this week's class and watched a thorough demonstration of how to build and place KML files. I enjoyed watching this process because it provided some transparency to a concept that I have previously been somewhat intimidated by. It is always inspiring to realize that something seemingly new or complicated is actually simple to learn and execute.

Before now, I have encountered KML files mostly via Google applications and sometimes touristy websites. Geotagging, as a concept, is a little more widespread. Flickr does a great job with geotagging (and can also be a great reference tool). But I'm excited by the prospect of using it in more library applications.

Week 6: Technologies Useful for Digital Repositories

First of all, I 'd like to say how much I have enjoyed reading Reese & Banerjee. Their writing is informative and accessible and I look forward to referring back to it. What I like about chapter four is that it is not explicitly about metadata, but retains a thread, throughout the chapter, emphasizing the role of metadata and its significance for digital library technologies, ultimately concluding that metadata is second only to content, as far as what is most important for any repository. While it is possible to make alternate arguments, e.g. that preservation is most important or that the ability to transfer content is most important, I feel partial to the metadata-centric approach and the idea that a collection is only as useful as it is findable.

I especially appreciated the inclusion of the "XML family tree" and the description of various XML components that followed, including XPATH, XFORMS, XLINK, etc. One aspect that I find especially intriguing is the function of the XLINK and the concept of describing the actual links between XML documents, as well as documents themselves. It seems that this type of description is at least loosely related to some of the concepts underlying the semantic web and the tendency toward a more data-driven web environment.

Week 5: Assessment

In week 5, we heard a very interesting and well-researched presentation from Jason Phillips on methods of assessment for digital libraries. I think this was a very important contribution to the class, for several reasons. It is tempting to want to focus very heavily on learning about technology and infrastructure--literally how to build digital libraries--sometimes without a user-centered or user-driven approach. It can also be easy to speculate on how users interact with systems or interfaces or digital collections, without necessarily taking well-planned methodological steps to test assumptions. Jason's presentation was particularly valuable for offering multiple assessment methods, with an understanding that there is no one right way to assess or evaluate a service or a digital collection. The nature of the content and the user community, among many additional factors, are critical factors in determining how, when, and why to assess a digital collection. These factors will likely change over time, impacting the chosen method of assessment.

Week 4: HTML & Preservation

In preparation for week 4, we were referred to Cornell Library's Digital Imaging Tutorial, available online here:

http://www.library.cornell.edu/preservation/tutorial/index.html

This is the second time I have encountered the site in an educational capacity and I find it to be among the most useful resources of its kind available to students and library professionals. It is very well-organized and easy to search and navigate. It is also a very informative site that provides a lot of technical information but is not weighed down by jargon; in other words, the content is very accessible to the student or lay reader. As a reference guide, I think this tutorial will continue to be useful for me in almost any capacity that I can imagine working in a library.

During the actual class, we spent a lot of time practicing simple html coding and put together small sample pages. I think that for anyone who hasn't had hands-on experience with html, this was certainly a valuable exercise. I have used html in school and at work several times and am familiar with how to transfer and upload files to a server. Still, it's useful to revisit the basics every so often.

Week 3: Live Digitizing

In the third week of class, we observed Professor Ballard demonstrating the process of placing digitized content online. He gave us the background information relating to selection of content (Quinnipiac's old course books), then demonstrated the simple task of uploading files. He usefully pointed out the difference between a scanned image and the coding of its content, a necessary element for searchability. The steps were simple, but nicely illustrative of the routine-oriented and often repetitive nature of digitization projects. In a way, the process demonstrated in the third week was reminiscent of putting a new book on a shelf. Scanning and uploading files are the simple and final steps in a more complex planning process, outlined in Week 2.

The Week 3 demonstration caused me to think again about how much of the process of building digital libraries really can seem like a behind-the-scenes effort. Uploading files and adding content to the web is easily demonstrable, while building an infrastructure, selecting resources, navigating file formats, assigning metadata, and preservation planning, are in many ways less tangible, though they are requisite components in the context of digitization projects at large. In this regard, I'd like to reiterate how effectively the Week 2 presentation, along with our textbook, have conveyed that there is much more than meets the eye to the process of building digital libraries.

Week 2: Nuts and Bolts

The second week's presentation provided a useful overview of the practical aspects involved in planning and creating digital libraries. The emphases on metadata, structure, and rights management were especially helpful. The presentation also drew on our course textbook, by Terry Reese and Kyle Banerjee. One of the things I appreciate about the textbook, as well as the second week's presentation, is the emphasis on planning and practicality. The more I read, the more I think that many of the issues facing digital libraries are incredibly similar to issues that libraries have dealt with forever, i.e. how do you select content? How do you preserve it? What are your standards for description and access? While we are applying these questions in a new realm, we should also be familiar with the nature of many of them. Figuring out how to acquire, process, classify, and describe digital content will necessarily be made complicated by issues related to preservation and rights management, but these are not insurmountable challenges, nor are they necessarily worlds apart from challenges of collection development and management that libraries have always faced.

Week 1: Creative Cataloging

The first week's presentation provided a comprehensive introduction to digital library projects, from the point of view of project underpinnings and inspiration. It is clear from Prof. Ballard's background that he has maintained a strong interest in technological changes and their impact on our profession, throughout his career. The presentation, with its reminder of the profound changes brought by electronic catalogs, was both striking and grounding. By this I mean to say that there was a clear emphasis on the scope of technological change in the last few decades, but without the sense of anxiety, zeal, or glorification that is sometimes present in library discourse. In other words, the first night's presentation was refreshing.

One of the most interesting aspects of the first night's presentation was the mention of Quinnipiac's cataloging records that include links to images and JSTOR book reviews. What I like about this practice is that it removes the ordinary bibliographic record from isolation. There was a clear sense throughout the presentation that the library catalog is existing within a wider web and can be integrated with other resources. It seems obvious that we should be doing this: taking advantage of the ability to link to relevant content directly from the catalog, or even to enhance our records by inserting additional content. I came away from the first evening's presentation with a sense of the potential to usefully situate our catalogs and resources within the wider web, in a way that a lot of libraries have yet to explore.