Although there are others – GLIS, TEI Headers, EAD, FGDC – (all good ones) – I really feel good about zeroing in on DC with perhaps differing profiles dependent on document type or subject area, for instance.  The number of profiles should be kept to a minimum, accepted as written, with contingency for exceptions through a separate profile.

I think it’s good to keep in mind some differing categories of metadata when formulating the differing profiles – administrative, rights, descriptive, technical.  I think also a controlled vocabulary should be decided upon for subject terms.

A few pieces I’ve been reading:

DC Metadata element set – ANSI/NISO Z39.85 2007
Guidelines for implementing DC in XML – Andy Powell, University of Bath, 2002
Metdata made simpler, Gail Hodge, NISO, 2001

Copyright restrictions – is there a legal reason why we would not be able to digitize our materials?

Increasing access – we want our materials to be more accessible for research and viewing

Scholarly research/input – ideally, curators, professors and scholars would contribute to ideas about what should be digitized

To raise the institutions’ profile – collections may receive more use if they are digitized and the ‘special gems’ of the collections would get wider recognition

To safeguard brittle or decaying originals from overuse – making a digitized copy available for use saves the original from extra wear and tear.  More so if the digital copy is made from an existing copy, like microfilm.

To commit to digitization in principle – Not just digitization for digitization’s sake, but to raise the profile of digitiaton initiatives campus-wide.  Fund-raisers should put it on their list.  The folks that accept gifts should negotiate digital rights, instructors would perhaps incorporate digital materials into their courses, etc. 

For preservation - Though there are serious questions about the long-term viability of digital copies as tools of presevation, there has been some promise shown when migration schedules are regulated and enforced.

Is the collection prepared to be digitized? – well organized and documented, in other words – This last seems to be the most problematic.  The staff, time and consequent funds required to prepare a collection to be digitized can be prohibitive.

Some published resources for selection guidelines…

Janet Gertz, “Selection Guidelines for Preservation”  updated .. http://www.nedcc.org/resources/leaflets/6Reformatting/06PreservationAndSelection.php

Library of Congress, National Digital Library Program, “NDLP Project Planning Checklist”   http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/prjplan.html

from Harvard… “Selection for Digitization: A Decision-Making Matrix”  http://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/hazen/matrix.html

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/194507/bush

The scientists did indeed turn to matters of The Great Record – a phrase I love, by the way.  It so captures the vastness of information to be retrieved, consulted and added to.  All of the possibillities that Bush postulates… most have come to pass.  But as man moves forward in his ability to record and archive, his retrieval abilities lag in progress.  This is the central message of Bush’s piece,  I think.   And, of course, the central problem in my current project some 60+ years later.  I’m looking into all sorts of possibilities for patterns and schemas of classification.  And I appreciate Bush’s associative searching.  It can be found in tag clouds of many types today all over the internet.  Some of the scholarly databases even employ a version of it. 

As I read this piece, though, and all its visions of possible futures for storage of data, I thought of something else I read.  The Rosetta Project aims to put a ridiculous amount of text, written by machine, of course, on the surface of a disk of nickel.  The purported life expectancy is 2 thousand years.  They suggest the information can be recaptured through reading the disk on a microscope.  I thought to myself… how will they find the one sentence they’re after?  where will they record the whole contents of the disk in a meaningful way… in other words, much the same questions as Bush had. 

I agree with Bush that machines will never reach man’s capacity to index, associate, or reference.  But I believe it is within our reach to teach machines to perform the tasks that take our time needlessly.  Today, with the limited reading I’ve done, my thinking is that the process will involve best guesses married to best intentions, with much migration in our data’s future. 

We will always reach farther, strive for better solutions.  And when they happen, we’ll slap our heads and say, “Of course!”   But knowing that’s coming isn’t a reason to put off finding a solution.  Though it would be more convenient for me if there were some authoritative voice on the matter with a single best guess.

     Picture the inside of an old library with massive mahogany shelves filled with dusty volumes and surrounding stone walls which safeguard them. As the POV travels through this library, it focuses on titles for which the collections are famous (good example: Galileo’s corrections to his manuscript)… These should be brief and the whole sequence should be no more than 90 seconds. A voice-over would set up the mood, then begin to give rationales for digitization. As the narrator’s argument reaches its peak, the POV begins to travel faster straight toward one of the stone walls, which comes into more detailed view. The narrator makes his strongest point as the wall appears to crumble outward, leaving a hole through which the POV travels, entering what appears to be a representational library with shelves made of pulsing light and volumes that tip off as the POV passes to expose TRON-like streaming green code on the pages. The POV continues to travel through these shelves as the narrator makes an explanation of the many facets to consider of a digital collection. The POV is coming to a terminal, which slowly fills the whole screen. We see the words as they are ‘typed’… “Hello, Dave. What would you like to access/learn/explore/research today?” (end of nifty-keen intro)

     This may not be technically feasible for me to develop in the timeframe but it’s a good starting point as a concept. In my mind I picture the Citizen Kane camera move from outside the window, through it, into another room, all seamless – but I don’t think I can make the animation with a high-enough production value. The bad graphics would distract from the message. I think a good alternative would be to travel along a single continuous bookshelf, through the wall – which is too cool to lose – and on to the digital shelf. This should be doable. The stops at titles should also serve the purpose of giving enough time for the .fla to load.

     Should go through the steps of developing a digitization program, delving into specifics of each one. Would be good to have an ongoing character (Ms. Wickens, maybe) to narrate (blink on beside the text, read some, smile) and demonstrations should try to be visually represented where practicable. Should talk to Stacy about her thoughts, David. Maybe one of the guys in IT is into this stuff (flash/web design) and would have something to offer. (Like help)

     I want firm divisions of steps. It’s easier to stay interested. Navigation should allow stop/start/redirect to any portion of the demonstration at any time. Consider background noise/music. Short overviews with links to more if interested.

     Conclusion should expand back out from terminal to again expose representative digital library. It would be cool to somehow have the origin of the digital volume be visually represented as the physical one. Maybe it’s behind it on the shelf – a shadow? Have to think on that.

     Should be vague and ultra brief on goal, selection, funding on the front end. Should just give options on maintenance, storage, format (pros and cons)… centerpiece should be the core of the presentation, the longest piece – it’s the workflow. Visually follow the steps an item would take through the process from acquisition (leaving the selection out purposely) through cataloging, imaging, storage and ending with a user (Ms. Wickens) accessing it. (Maybe through the OU libraries cat?) It would be awesome to conclude at the accessing of the item with the expansion out to the larger digital library.

So here’s what I’ve done since last we spoke…. I had ordered several books and all but one has come in. The first was a book about the Gund Collection. It’s a small art collection. This particular book tells the backstory of some of the works and the artists. Remington & Russell are prominently featured and the collection is dominated by their works. There’s a revealing portrait of Gund himself and some of the impetus behind his choices. All of this was absorbing. Though no education is a waste, I realize the most germane element of this book to my project is the last section. It is the catalog of the works of the Gund Collection.

Each entry gives the name of the piece, the medium in which it was created, the artist, and its physical dimensions. Each entry also includes some of what I’ll refer to as the provenance details. How many castings were made of a bronze work, for instance; the state or area of the country where the work was created or which inspired it; what tribe the subject is from, etc. It was interesting to me that dates were not always included. Copyright dates are given, of course, when applicable. Only 25 of the 71 works listed, however, mention a date of any kind. I have a big juicy streak of wanting to bring order to all discovered chaos and aberration so these anomalies are difficult for me to digest as they are. I believe my attitude in this regard is a reflection of how a computer would feel about it, so my instinct tells me that the way I would bring order to it in my mind would be a good way to organization the data digitally.

I chose this book because I felt that a small collection would be a great microcosm that would make it easy for me to boil down what details matter. I knew it was an art collection and that it wouldn’t include details specific to other works, but it would be a good place to put my feet. Plus it’s terrifically interesting.

One of the other books was one published in 1950 about the beginning and growth of the Denver Public Library. Yellowed and encased in acid-free plastic, the slim volume was written by the librarian, Malcolm Wyer. He first discussed how and why the collection was started, specifically mentioning a nearby college professor’s suggestion that they make a concerted effort to acquire a pictorial history of the west. This early suggestion has obviously ripened into one of – if not THE greatest – collections of western history art works in the world. The Library of Congress borrows from the Denver Public Library, as I’m sure you knew but of which I have just recently become aware. Also of value to me in this reading were the many new words I came across. I found myself looking up photogravures, rotogravure, glass negatives, daguerreotypes, lantern slides, and more. These led to a broader education in illustration types than I think was strictly necessary for this project but which was, again, very interesting.

Wyer speaks of individuals who made philanthropic contributions as well as specific acquisitions that advanced the collection. The photographs of David Barry, a collection of Remington works, the negatives of the photographer William Jackson, and the works of Alfred Mathews and Karl Bodmer, among others. Some groups of works were acquired which depict a specific area, people, or event. The first half of the booklet is, in fact, absorbed in tales of pictorial acquisitions with one paragraph which refers to “the standard sets of books on the Indians.”

Wyer gives prominence, however, to the ‘books, pamphelets, magazines, and clippings’ of the collection. He goes on to talk about specific acquisitions again. The story of the Eugene Fields collection of Mr. Morse are discussed, as well as the Buffalo Bill collection. Buffalo Bill’s Wild West Show produced many programs, pamphlets, and other ephemera and the Denver Public Library has it all. Wyer also includes a colorful description of one the Library’s most valued possessions – a full set of the regional newspaper, the Solid Muldoon. Many other individual acquisitions are mentioned, emphasizing the variety and scope of the collection. There are manuals which set down the regulations of mining camps, directories of Fifty-Niners, maps, and many, many others.

In describing the breadth of the DPL’s collection, Wyer emphasizes the skill and local knowledge required in selecting and acquiring material for the library. A sense of the history of the region, its people, significant events, trends, patterns of migration and development… these are what turn one’s nose toward the truly remarkable finds.

It is, again, in the last bit that I find the material most applicable to the project. Wyer talks about the difficulties of this type of collection being housed in a public library. He feels convinced that, due to the increasing use of materials from an ever-widening geographic pool of interested parties, the library should make much more extensive use of microfilm and Photostat copies. This is the most interesting statement to me because it lies at the heart of my project. That is – to provide wider, better access while protecting our collections for the future.

This blog entry is getting overlong and I still have much to talk about. My fault completely for wanting to read more than I wanted to write. I am also painfully aware that my audience knows much more than I about all the points of my writing and I fear boring you. I will end this entry by saying that knowledge of how a collection grows – what is acquired, by what means, and when – is just as important to building a system of cataloging as are the different points of data inherent in a given work or group of works. To build into one’s system a way to accommodate changes is, I think, the hardest part. There are many who can take a static collection and pin it down in all corners – it’s the management of a living, growing, changing entity that is the ultimate hat-trick. I’ve read more than I’ve talked about, but that’s more than enough for now. Any feedback is welcome.

          -Guide to Manuscripts in the Western History Collections of the University of           Oklahoma, Kristina L. Southwell
          -The Gund Collection of Western Art: a history and pictorial description of the           American West, Maria Naylor
          -Western history collection,: Its beginning and growth by Wyer, Malcolm           Glenn
          -Science and Technology Libraries, vol. 27, Kreitz, et al
          -Scientific and Technical Libraries; Their Organization and Administration,           Strauss, et al
          -American Indian Resource Materials in the Western History Collections,           University of Oklahoma, DeWitt
          -Moving Theory into Practice; Digital Imaging for Libraries and Archives,           Kenney & Rieger

I’ll also be looking into the latest info on the subjects I’m investigating through recent articles published.  But I wished to get a good base of understanding before going into current thought.  I’ll add articles here as I find them.  I am, of course, interested in any relevant suggestions of reading.  Please feel free to add suggestions through the comments.

My second order of business on this first week’s post (I intend to update this blog every Friday) is to give a breakdown of my project and a tentative timeline.

I’d like to get the reading in first.  I’m calling this Phase One. 
I need to focus my reading into the areas of:

          –Western History; general, specific to OU, and specific to peer collections
          –History of Science; general, specific to OU, and specific to peer collections
          –Metadata management; general, specific to OU, and specific to peer           collections

I’m seeing this as taking 3 - 5 weeks.

Phase Two is familiarizing myself withe the web interface of both OU Special Collections and the peer collections.  I see this as taking a week or so.

Phase Three is meeting with the stakeholders involved and gathering their thoughts and suggestions.  Given busy schedules, I’m not sure how long this will take.

Phase Four is developing a report of my findings.  I’m going to write up a paper version but I also will be developing a flash presentation to be parked on a server and viewable to whomever may be interested.  I believe this will take 2 – 3 weeks.

The whole project should take 6 – 10 weeks barring major disruptions.

Speaking of which, I end this first week’s post reporting that I have spent this first short week formulating the above plan and enjoying the flu. 

NEXT WEEK: Since some of the books I’m reading on Western History were ordered and won’t be in for a couple of weeks, I’ll begin my reading with History of Science.  Should have some content to report on the subject.

As always, please contribute whatever research suggestions you think would be helpful through the comments.