NDSA:Content WG August 3, 2011 Meeting Minutes

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 are next steps to reach our goal? Our action team B goal is:

Develop a clearinghouse that will enable a variety of stakeholders (content producers, archives and libraries and other potential preservationists) to:

 *   Determine what specific types of content or collections are at risk.
 *   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. 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

Talked throught the action items in the minutes. 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).

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? 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?

Margie – coordinate with other group/registry is key.

Kristine and Christine, Abbie can be the bridge between two groups. Michael Stoller.

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.

Action item: Wordpress plugin, get in touch. Abbie and Kristine could help figure out how to move foward.

Datasets and directories: 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.

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?

2. Action team B report, if needed.

No updates from Action team B.

Next meeting, Sept 7, 11ET.