Friday, December 3, 2010
Muddiest Point for 12/7
Can you clarify what should be included in the "problem statement" of our DL report? Also, how does the "conceptual design" aspect of the report differ from the "schemas for representing and organizing digital objects"?
Readings for Week of 12/7
The Daily Times news piece author carries many of the same sentiments as I do regarding intellectual property. While it does serve its purpose for giving incentives to create, current IP laws also have a rather "chilling" effect on technological and cultural innovations for fear of rightsholder violations. It's so important that open access becomes the norm for certain information like computer source coding. Without allowing programmers to build off each other's work we wouldn't have the technology sources we have today, such as Unix operating systems and the internet itself.
The article related to Funding for Digital Libraries Research outlines the history of digital funding, especially for the National Science Foundation. It's easy to forget and take for granted how far along technology has come in terms of storage capabilities even compared to ten years ago. Something that struck me in the reading was how the NSF's budget for their supercomputer in the 90's, $60,000,000. When the article was written, in 2005, the capabilities of that supercomputer could be largely carried out by a small network of personal computers costing around $5,000. I wonder what those figures look like today.
The article in 2001 regarding the President’s Information Technology Advisory
Committee (PITAC) showed efforts on a grand governmental scale to highlight the importance of digitizing archives. The panel was addressed to the former President, G.W. Bush, suggesting that digital libraries are the future for expansion and provides an important framework for fostering education. This came at a time when Bush implemented his "No Child Left Behind" policies to the nation. While there were some good points to this article, such that public documents should be readily available through the Internet, the fact that it was implemented in response to one of Bush's worst policies taints the effort in my opinion.
The Clifford Lynch article was interesting, and I found one of his opening statements to be rather controversial: "...though some would argue that digital libraries have very little to do with libraries as institutions or the practice of librarianship." Just by taking this class it's easy to see the relevance of librarianship, especially metadata, controlled vocabularies, intellectual property concerns, and preservation and dissemination of information and documents to the application of digital libraries.
The article related to Funding for Digital Libraries Research outlines the history of digital funding, especially for the National Science Foundation. It's easy to forget and take for granted how far along technology has come in terms of storage capabilities even compared to ten years ago. Something that struck me in the reading was how the NSF's budget for their supercomputer in the 90's, $60,000,000. When the article was written, in 2005, the capabilities of that supercomputer could be largely carried out by a small network of personal computers costing around $5,000. I wonder what those figures look like today.
The article in 2001 regarding the President’s Information Technology Advisory
Committee (PITAC) showed efforts on a grand governmental scale to highlight the importance of digitizing archives. The panel was addressed to the former President, G.W. Bush, suggesting that digital libraries are the future for expansion and provides an important framework for fostering education. This came at a time when Bush implemented his "No Child Left Behind" policies to the nation. While there were some good points to this article, such that public documents should be readily available through the Internet, the fact that it was implemented in response to one of Bush's worst policies taints the effort in my opinion.
The Clifford Lynch article was interesting, and I found one of his opening statements to be rather controversial: "...though some would argue that digital libraries have very little to do with libraries as institutions or the practice of librarianship." Just by taking this class it's easy to see the relevance of librarianship, especially metadata, controlled vocabularies, intellectual property concerns, and preservation and dissemination of information and documents to the application of digital libraries.
Thursday, November 18, 2010
Muddiest Point for 11/23
In Special Collections we have a university-developed software program that helps the non-programmer put finding aids and catalog records online. Called the Archivists' Toolkit, the software allows people who aren't familiar with writing EAD code to enter data in to the existing database. I was wondering if many larger institutions develop these types of applications to make it easier for everyone to contribute to online digital records.
Readings for Week of 11/23
The reading for Social Aspects of Digital Libraries is an interesting study because the panel workshop was put together to identify the social conditions that a digital library serves. The group organized their panel and participants by two variables of social needs regarding digital libraries; information needs, and end-user searching and filtering. Three facets of research study were also introduced: human, artifact, and system-centered. The study called for input from several areas and specialists in research development, so to better improve the relationships between each social aspect of a digital library.
The Infinite Library article isn't accessible in its entirety unless you have a subscription. The webpage is dated 2010, but I think the article is outdated, because at the end it notes that Harvard is one of the participants in Google's Print and Book Search project. I happen to remember from my copyright class that Harvard actually dropped out of the project and are now one of the voices concerning potential adverse library affects caused by the project. Nonetheless, the reader should draw from the article that Google's proposed plan both has potentially positive and negative implications for libraries. On the one hand, it would be great to have a portal from which millions of culturally important documents can be retrieved, but if (and when) it does become unnecessary for the information-seeker to visit the library to find relevant material, the library may face even more scrutiny for obsolescence.
Arms' article on differing viewpoints for a digital library provided a different approach to the study of DLs. It included viewpoint analysis, typically reserved for computer software programming, in the development of DLs. The article looks at the DL from three different viewpoints; the user, the organizational, and the technical. From examining these viewpoints, DL developers can account for structural and social aspects that both relate to the quality and usability of the digital library.
The Infinite Library article isn't accessible in its entirety unless you have a subscription. The webpage is dated 2010, but I think the article is outdated, because at the end it notes that Harvard is one of the participants in Google's Print and Book Search project. I happen to remember from my copyright class that Harvard actually dropped out of the project and are now one of the voices concerning potential adverse library affects caused by the project. Nonetheless, the reader should draw from the article that Google's proposed plan both has potentially positive and negative implications for libraries. On the one hand, it would be great to have a portal from which millions of culturally important documents can be retrieved, but if (and when) it does become unnecessary for the information-seeker to visit the library to find relevant material, the library may face even more scrutiny for obsolescence.
Arms' article on differing viewpoints for a digital library provided a different approach to the study of DLs. It included viewpoint analysis, typically reserved for computer software programming, in the development of DLs. The article looks at the DL from three different viewpoints; the user, the organizational, and the technical. From examining these viewpoints, DL developers can account for structural and social aspects that both relate to the quality and usability of the digital library.
Thursday, November 11, 2010
Muddiest Point for 11/16
According to Saracevic, DL usability is not well-defined, nor are there specified criteria for evaluating it. I'm assuming this means there are no standards to follow when constructing DLs for usability, so what kind of sources for usability criteria could a person building a DL look to?
Readings for Interaction and Evaluation, 11/16
Unfortunately, the Arms Chapter 8 link would not open, as it seems it no longer exists at Cornell's site.
The Kling and Elliot article on digital library design defines cultural models for interpreting usability in digital libraries. They focus on two forms of DL usability; interface and organizational. It also discusses five models from which DL computer systems are generated, as incorporated by cultural models. There are also four dimensions of DLs that can be used to test interface usability: learnability; efficiency; memorability; and errors. The dimensions to test organizational usability are accessibility, compatibility, integrability in to work practices, and social-organizational expertise.
Saracevic's evaluation of DLs is based from 80 or so previous studies of DL evaluation. The focus was to isolate (or deconstruct) the studies based on their construct, context, criteria, and methods used for study. The author even goes on to group literature on DLs evaluation in two categories; meta (about literature), and object (on literature).
Scheiderman and Plaisant's chapter on interactive system usability emphasizes the importance of making digital objects appear simplistically, which is actually a very complicated process and takes more care than most people acknowledge. Nelson also goes in to some detail about the future of technology, and how the nature of digital information is transitioning to be mobile, such as in mobile apparatuses and the planting of computer chips under people's skin.
The Kling and Elliot article on digital library design defines cultural models for interpreting usability in digital libraries. They focus on two forms of DL usability; interface and organizational. It also discusses five models from which DL computer systems are generated, as incorporated by cultural models. There are also four dimensions of DLs that can be used to test interface usability: learnability; efficiency; memorability; and errors. The dimensions to test organizational usability are accessibility, compatibility, integrability in to work practices, and social-organizational expertise.
Saracevic's evaluation of DLs is based from 80 or so previous studies of DL evaluation. The focus was to isolate (or deconstruct) the studies based on their construct, context, criteria, and methods used for study. The author even goes on to group literature on DLs evaluation in two categories; meta (about literature), and object (on literature).
Scheiderman and Plaisant's chapter on interactive system usability emphasizes the importance of making digital objects appear simplistically, which is actually a very complicated process and takes more care than most people acknowledge. Nelson also goes in to some detail about the future of technology, and how the nature of digital information is transitioning to be mobile, such as in mobile apparatuses and the planting of computer chips under people's skin.
Muddiest Point from 11/9
Do website managers have to send their data from a closing site to archive.org in order for it to be archived, or is the site responsible for knowing which websites are to be closing so they may receive permission to archive?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)