NDSA:November 2 Blog Preservation Meeting Minutes: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 37: | Line 37: | ||
Abbie provided a quick report on how we got to this meeting (referring to the distributed blog proposal). She summed up the three ideas listed in that proposal, but explained that this meeting was to focus particularly on the "Flag for opt-in to preservation and harvesting" idea. | Abbie provided a quick report on how we got to this meeting (referring to the distributed blog proposal). She summed up the three ideas listed in that proposal, but explained that this meeting was to focus particularly on the "Flag for opt-in to preservation and harvesting" idea. | ||
==Discussion | ==Discussion== | ||
Some of the questions received before the meeting included: | Some of the questions received before the meeting included: | ||
*If a blog owner opts-in, would that guarantee preservation? | *If a blog owner opts-in, would that guarantee preservation? | ||
The idea is that mostly likely, yes: IA will crawl everything that is flagged by site owners for preservation. Other NDSA members will be able to select from the list what they would like to include in their own archives. Multiple organizations may collect the same URLs (duplication is not a bad thing). | |||
*Will blog owners expect backup services if they opt-in? | *Will blog owners expect backup services if they opt-in? | ||
We talked quite a bit about making sure the purpose of the pilot is clear to site owners, and that this particular plugin is not meant to be able to provide backup services. Ideas #1 and #2 about downloading a for personal backup would cover this sort of request, most likely. | |||
*How do we get notified that blogs have opted-in? Are notices sent somewhere? Some other ideas: | *How do we get notified that blogs have opted-in? Are notices sent somewhere? Some other ideas: | ||
*A Google spreadsheet that gets auto-updated; preservationists could refer to and pick and choose what to preserve. | **A Google spreadsheet that gets auto-updated; preservationists could refer to and pick and choose what to preserve. | ||
*Machine-readable tag that could be used to auto-detect sites that have opted-in (a la creative commons) | **Machine-readable tag that could be used to auto-detect sites that have opted-in (a la creative commons) | ||
*A feed of some sort? | **A feed of some sort? | ||
Andrew said he could do whatever we want -- he demonstrated a mockup of a simple plugin idea, which is essentially just "submit for preservation" button. The group discussed a number or options for what would happen upon submitting. The easiest approach is to have that data get sent to an established URL to populate a database. More on this in the proposal for moving ahead under next steps. | |||
*How often/frequently would notifications or updates to whatever process we put in place occur? | *How often/frequently would notifications or updates to whatever process we put in place occur? | ||
*Is a license/agreement needed? | *Is a license/agreement needed? | ||
*What sorts of information would we want from the blog owner besides permission? (category/subject? Frequency of change information? Other data?) | *What sorts of information would we want from the blog owner besides permission? (category/subject? Frequency of change information? Other data?) | ||
*Do we want data shared about who is preserving what? If organizations are picking and choosing what to preserve from the available blogs, might be good to have that information available to others (publicly or among NDSA members?) | *Do we want data shared about who is preserving what? If organizations are picking and choosing what to preserve from the available blogs, might be good to have that information available to others (publicly or among NDSA members?) | ||
Additional questions/concerns that came up during the discussion: | |||
==Next Steps/Action Items== | |||
Revision as of 10:18, 4 November 2011
November 2, 2011, 11am ET
Attendees
- Anderson, Janice Snyder | Georgetown University Law Library | anderjan@law.georgetown.edu
- Anderson, Martha | Director, NDIIPP, Library of Congress | mande@loc.gov
- Baker, Timothy D. | Maryland State Archives | timb@MDSA.NET
- Beers, Elizabeth | University of Michigan Library | embeers@umich.edu
- Carpenter, Kris | Internet Archive | kcarpenter@archive.org
- Chudnoff, Dan | George Washington University | dchud@gwu.edu
- Fallon, Tessa | Columbia University | taf2111@columbia.edu
- Fido-Radin, Ben | Rhizome | ben.finoradin@rhizome.org
- Grotke, Abbie | Library of Congress, Co-Chair of the NDSA Content Working Group | abgr@LOC.GOV
- Hanna, Kristine | Internet Archive | kristine@ARCHIVE.ORG
- Hartman, Cathy | University of North Texas/ Co-Chair of the NDSA Content Working Group | cathy.hartman@UNT.EDU
- Jones, Gina | Library of Congress | gjon@loc.gov
- Johnston, Leslie | Library of Congress | lesliej@loc.gov
- Moffatt, Christie | National Library of Medicine | moffattc@mail.nlm.nih.gov
- Nacin, Andrew | Wordpress | andrewnacin@gmail.com
- Owens, Trevor | Library of Congress | trow@loc.gov
- Potter, Abbey | Library of Congress | abpo@LOC.GOV
- Reib, Linda | Arizona State Library, Archives, and Public Records | lreib@LIB.AZ.US
- Schmitz Furhrig, Lynda | Smithsonian Institution | SchmitzfuhrigL@si.edu
- Smith, Stephanie | Maryland State Archives
- Taylor, Nicholas | Library of Congress | ntay@loc.gov
- Wurl, Joel | National Endowment for the Humanities | jwurl@neh.gov
(Attendees from NDSA member organizations in bold)
AGENDA
Welcome/Introductions
Attendees introduced themselves and talked about their specific interests in this project.
Brief report on background of this idea
Abbie provided a quick report on how we got to this meeting (referring to the distributed blog proposal). She summed up the three ideas listed in that proposal, but explained that this meeting was to focus particularly on the "Flag for opt-in to preservation and harvesting" idea.
Discussion
Some of the questions received before the meeting included:
- If a blog owner opts-in, would that guarantee preservation?
The idea is that mostly likely, yes: IA will crawl everything that is flagged by site owners for preservation. Other NDSA members will be able to select from the list what they would like to include in their own archives. Multiple organizations may collect the same URLs (duplication is not a bad thing).
- Will blog owners expect backup services if they opt-in?
We talked quite a bit about making sure the purpose of the pilot is clear to site owners, and that this particular plugin is not meant to be able to provide backup services. Ideas #1 and #2 about downloading a for personal backup would cover this sort of request, most likely.
- How do we get notified that blogs have opted-in? Are notices sent somewhere? Some other ideas:
- A Google spreadsheet that gets auto-updated; preservationists could refer to and pick and choose what to preserve.
- Machine-readable tag that could be used to auto-detect sites that have opted-in (a la creative commons)
- A feed of some sort?
Andrew said he could do whatever we want -- he demonstrated a mockup of a simple plugin idea, which is essentially just "submit for preservation" button. The group discussed a number or options for what would happen upon submitting. The easiest approach is to have that data get sent to an established URL to populate a database. More on this in the proposal for moving ahead under next steps.
- How often/frequently would notifications or updates to whatever process we put in place occur?
- Is a license/agreement needed?
- What sorts of information would we want from the blog owner besides permission? (category/subject? Frequency of change information? Other data?)
- Do we want data shared about who is preserving what? If organizations are picking and choosing what to preserve from the available blogs, might be good to have that information available to others (publicly or among NDSA members?)
Additional questions/concerns that came up during the discussion: