NDSA:Content WG August 3, 2011 Meeting Minutes: Difference between revisions

From DLF Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page with ' CWG meeting minutes Agenda: 1. Action Team B: Update on the NDIIPP/NDSA workshop on categories of at-risk content -outcomes of the discussions (see notes on the wiki) - what…')
 
m (8 revisions imported: Migrate NDSA content from Library of Congress)
 
(7 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
Return to [[NDSA:Content Working Group]] Home


== NDSA Content Meeting Minutes ==


CWG meeting minutes
Wednesday, August 3, 2011 11:00 am ET


===Attendees (11)===


Agenda:
*Downs, Robert  | CIESIN, Columbia University  | rdowns@ciesin.columbia.edu
1. Action Team B: Update on the NDIIPP/NDSA workshop on categories of at-risk content -outcomes of the discussions (see notes on the wiki)
*Grotke, Abbie  | Web Archiving Team Lead, Library of Congress, and Co-Chair of the NDSA Content Working Group  | abgr@LOC.GOV | 202-707-2833 | @agrotke
- what are next steps to reach our goal? Our action team B goal is:
*Hanna, Kristine | Internet Archive  | kristine@ARCHIVE.ORG
*Hartman, Cathy | Associate Dean of Libraries, University of North Texas/ Co-Chair of the NDSA Content Working Group  | cathy.hartman@UNT.EDU
*Kuan, Christine | Artstor | christine.kuan@artstor.org
*Maes, Margaret | Legal Information Preservation Alliance | mkmaes@gmail.com
*Pittman, Kitty | Oklahoma Department of Libraries  | kpittman@OLTN.ODL.STATE.OK.US
*Reib, Linda  | Arizona State Library, Archives, and Public Records  | lreib@LIB.AZ.US
*Rossum, Deborah  |Digital Content Manager|  SCOLA  |712-566-2202|  drossum@SCOLA.ORG
*Swanson, Rebecca | SCOLA | rswanson@scola.org
*Weise, John | Manager of the Digital Library Production Service (DLPS) at the University of Michigan | jweise@UMICH.EDU


Develop a clearinghouse that will enable a variety of stakeholders (content producers, archives and libraries and other potential preservationists) to:
==Action Team B: Update on the NDIIPP/NDSA workshop on categories of at-risk content ==


  *  Determine what specific types of content or collections are at risk.
The main item to discuss was the workshop and possible next steps.  
  *  Identify at-risk content or collections for preservation.
  *  Match orphan collections with appropriate trusted partner for access and preservation.
-how does "value" of content fit into our discussions of at-risk material?


Kristine: Action items that will be informed by who was at workshop and on call today.
For those of us who haven't yet read the notes from the workshop, please do. Abbie sent them out yesterday.
Abbie sent notes, did others have a chance to review? Some did.
Interesting ideas to move forward. We need volunteers to step up and help out at this point. We had the workshop to move the discussion forward, to help identify the at-risk categories and refine the list. Examples were shown. Broke up into groups..


What do we want to do next?  What are we signing up for? Came out of meeting there were some action items compiled. Reaching out
Kristine and others attending reported out from the workshop. Interesting ideas came out of the workshop to move forward. We need volunteers to step up and help out at this point. We had the workshop to move the discussion forward, to help identify the at-risk categories and refine the list. Examples were shown. We broke up into groups and there were action items identified from each group of where we could go next.


Talked throught the action items in the minutes.
That is a big question for the CWG: what do we want to do next? What are we signing up for? Came out of meeting there were some action items compiled. Reaching out
State and local: new action team for appraisal of local government information. Horror stories are at the local level. Margie reported out. Examples from the group, data that appeared on inditividual’s computers but didn’t realize they had something that wasn’t published elsewhere. Floppy or hard drive. Never preserved. Probably tons of examples. How do we get at that sort of thing.
Pre-digital, how was it handled? Is this new to the digital world? Guess is that it always existed, but with paper it’s easier to resurrect. We’re not so sure electronic info is being uncovered when changes take place.  


Linda from AZ will help. Margie. We could poll the list to see if others would like to help. Katie from OK.  Margie will lead. (need to define charge as a group).  
We talked through the action items in the minutes.  


Cultural heritage: participants wanted to discuss the clearinghouse, whether we wanted to do that as a group. Is it valuable to have? Concern that intitiative might be seen as putting onto instiuttions about forcing selecting criteria. What level should that exist?
'''State and local:''' Margie sat in on that table and reported out about the discussion. Local government information is a particular concern. Horror stories are really at the local level. Examples from the group: data that appeared on individual’s computers but didn’t realize they had something that wasn’t published elsewhere. Floppy or hard drives. Never preserved. Probably tons of examples. How do we get at that sort of thing? John asked about pre-digital, how was it handled? Is this new to the digital world? Our guess is that it always existed, but with paper content is easier to resurrect. We’re not so sure electronic info is being uncovered when changes take place.  
Yes, valuable, as long as its enabling and helping. Engage the enthusiasts, passionate folks who want tosave creative and cultural content. Consumers and technologists.  


Get input from creators on what content that should be captured. Pull in the outreach working group.  What is this clearinghosue going to look like?
''NEXT STEPS:'' The group supported the idea of a '''new action team''' regarding appraisal of local government information. Margie agreed to lead (with some additional guidance about what the charge of the group will be). Linda and Kitty also agreed to help. Abbie will poll the list to see if others would like to help.


Margie – coordinate with other group/registry is key.
'''Cultural heritage:''' Kristine reported on on this breakout group. Participants wanted to discuss the clearinghouse, whether we wanted to do that as a group. Is it valuable to have? Concern that initiative might be seen as forcing selecting criteria on institutions. What level should selection policies exist? Overall they thought it was valuable, as long as its enabling and helping. This group was particularly interested in engaging the enthusiasts, passionate folks who want to save creative and cultural content. Consumers and technologists. Get input from creators on what content that should be captured. We talked about working with the outreach working group to come up with a strategy for this. What is this Clearinghouse going to look like? And can it help?


Kristine and Christine, Abbie can be the bridge between two groups. Michael Stoller.  
Margie mentioned that we should also coordinate with the registry group to be sure these two initiatives are in sync.


NEWS: Abbie reported out. John Weise mentioned Annarborchronicle.com – dedicated to city council meetings, writing them up, local government is covered. Published in blog format. An example to look at. Kristine – clearinghouse could be a wway for people who know about citizen journalism and local news – might be something to raise awareness on. Define clearing house , let them know they can help identify.  
''NEXT STEPS:'' Kristine and Christine offered to take some next steps with really thinking about what the Clearinghouse will be. Abbie is also interested and can help be the bridge between the clearinghouse and registry. Kristine will talk to Michael Stoller as well - he was in that group and had some ideas. Abbie will poll the list to see if others would like to help.


Action item: Wordpress plugin, get in touch. Abbie and Kristine could help figure out how to move foward.
'''News and Events:''' Abbie reported out. The focus was more on local news and citizen journalism. John Weise mentioned Annarborchronicle.com as example of something potentially at risk in this area. The site is dedicated to city council meetings, writing them up, local government is covered. Published in blog format. We discussed that maybe the  clearinghouse could be a way for people who know about particularly at risk citizen journalism and local news to let us know about – might be something to raise awareness as well. The previous NDIIPP meeting on citizen journalism was brought up, many of the same themes. Again, if we can define the clearinghouse, and have appropriate outreach, we can enable to community to get more involved.  


Datasets and directories:
''NEXT STEPS:'' Abbie and Kristine are going to explore how to enable bloggers to self preserve or identify that they are willing to be preserved. The Wordpress plugin idea - we need to get in touch with the Wordpress guy and other contacts who might help. Abbie and Kristine are going to think about how to move forward. Abbie will poll the list to see if others would like to help. Might need some technical expertise that Abbie and Kristine admit they don't have.  
Again, encourage citizens and scientiests. Connect people through the registry.  


We need to talk with chairs of outreach chairs: Butch and Carol: Margie and Deborah have been following what they are doing, but not too active. Right now they are focused out outreach to library school community, we think. More framework for the workshop, but other groups might be able to use the framework.  
'''Datasets and directories:''' No one on the call sat in on this breakout group, so we reviewed the minutes.
Again, encourage citizens and scientists to engage in the discussion about what is at risk. The same theme: connect people through the registry. No action items on this specifically, but work in general on the registry and outreach will be tied into the concerns of this group.  


Cultural heritiage, data sets and directories. Big issues – major national publicity. Maybe just tie into clearinghouse.


HOW does value of content fit into discussion of at-risk?
The group discussed this need for outreach more fully, and the need to coordinate with the Outreach WG. Abbie and Cathy will try to talk with the chairs soon: Butch and Carol. Margie and Deborah have been following what they are doing, but not too active in the other groups. Right now they are focused out outreach to library school community, we think, but building a framework for reaching out to other communities.


2. Action team B report, if needed.
Cultural heritage, data sets and directories. Big issues – major national publicity. Maybe just tie into clearinghouse?
 
Briefly we discussed how value of content fits into discussion of at-risk. But this is tricky - one person's valued content is not another persons valued content.
 
==Action team B report==


No updates from Action team B.
No updates from Action team B.


-------------------------------------------


Next meeting, Sept 7, 11ET.
== Next Meeting ==
 
Our next call will be September 7 at 11am EST. Agenda and call details to be sent a few days prior.
 
-End-

Latest revision as of 15:18, 11 February 2016

Return to NDSA:Content Working Group Home

NDSA Content Meeting Minutes

Wednesday, August 3, 2011 11:00 am ET

Attendees (11)

  • Downs, Robert | CIESIN, Columbia University | rdowns@ciesin.columbia.edu
  • Grotke, Abbie | Web Archiving Team Lead, Library of Congress, and Co-Chair of the NDSA Content Working Group | abgr@LOC.GOV | 202-707-2833 | @agrotke
  • Hanna, Kristine | Internet Archive | kristine@ARCHIVE.ORG
  • Hartman, Cathy | Associate Dean of Libraries, University of North Texas/ Co-Chair of the NDSA Content Working Group | cathy.hartman@UNT.EDU
  • Kuan, Christine | Artstor | christine.kuan@artstor.org
  • Maes, Margaret | Legal Information Preservation Alliance | mkmaes@gmail.com
  • Pittman, Kitty | Oklahoma Department of Libraries | kpittman@OLTN.ODL.STATE.OK.US
  • Reib, Linda | Arizona State Library, Archives, and Public Records | lreib@LIB.AZ.US
  • Rossum, Deborah |Digital Content Manager| SCOLA |712-566-2202| drossum@SCOLA.ORG
  • Swanson, Rebecca | SCOLA | rswanson@scola.org
  • Weise, John | Manager of the Digital Library Production Service (DLPS) at the University of Michigan | jweise@UMICH.EDU

Action Team B: Update on the NDIIPP/NDSA workshop on categories of at-risk content

The main item to discuss was the workshop and possible next steps.

For those of us who haven't yet read the notes from the workshop, please do. Abbie sent them out yesterday.

Kristine and others attending reported out from the workshop. Interesting ideas came out of the workshop to move forward. We need volunteers to step up and help out at this point. We had the workshop to move the discussion forward, to help identify the at-risk categories and refine the list. Examples were shown. We broke up into groups and there were action items identified from each group of where we could go next.

That is a big question for the CWG: what do we want to do next? What are we signing up for? Came out of meeting there were some action items compiled. Reaching out

We talked through the action items in the minutes.

State and local: Margie sat in on that table and reported out about the discussion. Local government information is a particular concern. Horror stories are really at the local level. Examples from the group: data that appeared on individual’s computers but didn’t realize they had something that wasn’t published elsewhere. Floppy or hard drives. Never preserved. Probably tons of examples. How do we get at that sort of thing? John asked about pre-digital, how was it handled? Is this new to the digital world? Our guess is that it always existed, but with paper content is easier to resurrect. We’re not so sure electronic info is being uncovered when changes take place.

NEXT STEPS: The group supported the idea of a new action team regarding appraisal of local government information. Margie agreed to lead (with some additional guidance about what the charge of the group will be). Linda and Kitty also agreed to help. Abbie will poll the list to see if others would like to help.

Cultural heritage: Kristine reported on on this breakout group. Participants wanted to discuss the clearinghouse, whether we wanted to do that as a group. Is it valuable to have? Concern that initiative might be seen as forcing selecting criteria on institutions. What level should selection policies exist? Overall they thought it was valuable, as long as its enabling and helping. This group was particularly interested in engaging the enthusiasts, passionate folks who want to save creative and cultural content. Consumers and technologists. Get input from creators on what content that should be captured. We talked about working with the outreach working group to come up with a strategy for this. What is this Clearinghouse going to look like? And can it help?

Margie mentioned that we should also coordinate with the registry group to be sure these two initiatives are in sync.

NEXT STEPS: Kristine and Christine offered to take some next steps with really thinking about what the Clearinghouse will be. Abbie is also interested and can help be the bridge between the clearinghouse and registry. Kristine will talk to Michael Stoller as well - he was in that group and had some ideas. Abbie will poll the list to see if others would like to help.

News and Events: Abbie reported out. The focus was more on local news and citizen journalism. John Weise mentioned Annarborchronicle.com as example of something potentially at risk in this area. The site is dedicated to city council meetings, writing them up, local government is covered. Published in blog format. We discussed that maybe the clearinghouse could be a way for people who know about particularly at risk citizen journalism and local news to let us know about – might be something to raise awareness as well. The previous NDIIPP meeting on citizen journalism was brought up, many of the same themes. Again, if we can define the clearinghouse, and have appropriate outreach, we can enable to community to get more involved.

NEXT STEPS: Abbie and Kristine are going to explore how to enable bloggers to self preserve or identify that they are willing to be preserved. The Wordpress plugin idea - we need to get in touch with the Wordpress guy and other contacts who might help. Abbie and Kristine are going to think about how to move forward. Abbie will poll the list to see if others would like to help. Might need some technical expertise that Abbie and Kristine admit they don't have.

Datasets and directories: No one on the call sat in on this breakout group, so we reviewed the minutes. Again, encourage citizens and scientists to engage in the discussion about what is at risk. The same theme: connect people through the registry. No action items on this specifically, but work in general on the registry and outreach will be tied into the concerns of this group.


The group discussed this need for outreach more fully, and the need to coordinate with the Outreach WG. Abbie and Cathy will try to talk with the chairs soon: Butch and Carol. Margie and Deborah have been following what they are doing, but not too active in the other groups. Right now they are focused out outreach to library school community, we think, but building a framework for reaching out to other communities.

Cultural heritage, data sets and directories. Big issues – major national publicity. Maybe just tie into clearinghouse?

Briefly we discussed how value of content fits into discussion of at-risk. But this is tricky - one person's valued content is not another persons valued content.

Action team B report

No updates from Action team B.


Next Meeting

Our next call will be September 7 at 11am EST. Agenda and call details to be sent a few days prior.

-End-

Retrieved from "https://wiki.diglib.org/index.php?title=NDSA:Content_WG_August_3,_2011_Meeting_Minutes&oldid=2917"