Friday, July 22, 2011
Thing 12: Creative Commons
Creative Commons-- a wonderful project which is helping to bridge some of the copyright gaps in the digital age. I had not thought of putting a Creative Commons license on my blog; I assume that anything intentionally placed on the platter of the public can be seen, and, also, adopted, and I would hope that the borrower would credit the originator. In actuality, though, creative content is copyrighted by default. This gap is one we just mostly ignore (hello Retweets and Youtube and anything mashed), because it is an unspoken, adopted tenet of the 2.0 age that things, as publicly posted, will be subject to iteration. Legally, this doesn't fly. Yet, fundamentally, the Internet breeds reanimation. Would you upload the technical drawings to your potential billion-dollar invention without obtaining a patent? Well, no. That would be dumb. This is why companies have intranets as well as internets--to keep proprietary information private. The Internet is not a safe haven for fully-copyrighted material, really. On the upside, however, it is this open, public venue that has the greatest potential to breed creativity and advance the common sense. Ideas for ideas' sake are tremendous gifts; user-centric programs central to the Web 2.0 era may have the greatest potential to deliver this content and these opportunities.
I would consider adding Creative Commons licenses to those of my created works that are not intended for profit. In the milieu of archives, we purveyors of historical oddities owe it to our colleagues and our repositories to share ideas that will sustain (and hopefully advance!) our profession. Innovation is paramount in keeping our archives afloat. Inventive programming, technology, and avenues of communication will help us to stay visible and usable, which will, in turn, obviate the necessity of our institutions.
Got ideas?
I would consider adding Creative Commons licenses to those of my created works that are not intended for profit. In the milieu of archives, we purveyors of historical oddities owe it to our colleagues and our repositories to share ideas that will sustain (and hopefully advance!) our profession. Innovation is paramount in keeping our archives afloat. Inventive programming, technology, and avenues of communication will help us to stay visible and usable, which will, in turn, obviate the necessity of our institutions.
Got ideas?
Tuesday, July 19, 2011
Thing 11: Geotagging
Imagine a scenario in which photographs, pages, Tweets, status updates, and even, someday, electronic item-level records, can be linked together on a map and interrelated based on their spatial proximity to one another. Institutions, archives and museums could coordinate geographically-related content, forging new connections between content, especially where that content has regional relevance.
Geotagging lends itself to construction of the beginning stages of this scenario. While a universal (ha) implementation seems nearly impossible (won't we have moved onto something more advanced by then?), there are still many educational opportunities to geotagging.
In an archival setting, a repository could establish a geotagging map after tagging some items from its collections. In this way, a user can visualize the spatial history of a theme, person, family, business, etc. Imagine a diary collection from a Depression-era family traveling across the "Dust Bowl" of the United States. While, due to budgetary and staffing limitations, it might be impossible, or, at the very least, impractical, to create records for each diary entry, it might be faster and equally interesting to tag places on a geotagging map. Users could instantly visualize the diary spatially, creating a whole additional dimension to research in a fraction of the time. The same could be true of linked collections (pieces of which are held at different repositories) or "unrelated" collections that share only a geographical point or a temporal one. Collections could be linked in a way that would lead users to them. I am sure we have all seen how a single collection can become isolated; this might be a simple way to increase visibility.
The possibilities are very exciting. However, there are also security concerns--particularly personal ones. I think geotagging seems like a worthwhile point of investigation for repositories, institutions, libraries, etc. I am a little leery of using it for my personal items, or those with my name attached to them. There are stalkers out there, after all. Just something to think about.
On a happier note-- got the Twitter going on the Blog. I'm starting to like Twitter... as long as I promise myself to keep it classy, archivist.
UPDATE: Geotagged this entry.
Geotagging lends itself to construction of the beginning stages of this scenario. While a universal (ha) implementation seems nearly impossible (won't we have moved onto something more advanced by then?), there are still many educational opportunities to geotagging.
In an archival setting, a repository could establish a geotagging map after tagging some items from its collections. In this way, a user can visualize the spatial history of a theme, person, family, business, etc. Imagine a diary collection from a Depression-era family traveling across the "Dust Bowl" of the United States. While, due to budgetary and staffing limitations, it might be impossible, or, at the very least, impractical, to create records for each diary entry, it might be faster and equally interesting to tag places on a geotagging map. Users could instantly visualize the diary spatially, creating a whole additional dimension to research in a fraction of the time. The same could be true of linked collections (pieces of which are held at different repositories) or "unrelated" collections that share only a geographical point or a temporal one. Collections could be linked in a way that would lead users to them. I am sure we have all seen how a single collection can become isolated; this might be a simple way to increase visibility.
The possibilities are very exciting. However, there are also security concerns--particularly personal ones. I think geotagging seems like a worthwhile point of investigation for repositories, institutions, libraries, etc. I am a little leery of using it for my personal items, or those with my name attached to them. There are stalkers out there, after all. Just something to think about.
On a happier note-- got the Twitter going on the Blog. I'm starting to like Twitter... as long as I promise myself to keep it classy, archivist.
UPDATE: Geotagged this entry.
Friday, July 15, 2011
Thing 10: Photosharing/Flickr
Hello archivist friends.
This week poses many new challenges to Web 2.0 use (i.e., I did not have a Flickr account either). The reasons are manifold, but primarily hinge on the fact that my professional photographs are few. I am interested to see how archives and museums are using their Flickr accounts (primarily for publicity purposes?). My personal photos have been stored on a very large social network that shall remain Faceless, since I first went digital in college. As we talked about on our jaunt through social networking, it seems cumbersome for me to, at this time, reinvent myself professionally on social networks (as an individual I mean-- I think establishing an institutional presence on a social network is important) by creating multiple accounts for the same venue. That's what LinkedIn is for, no? But, similar to with my inquiry into the personal/professional line during professional networking (I shared a link to a LinkedIn string about keeping networking identities at least relatively separate) I (and everyone else, I am sure) have decided that mixing social and professional genres in photographs is equally laden with potential for faux pas. Thus, and forgive my serpentine route to this practically inevitable conclusion-- Tweeters, gasping-- I suppose creation of another account was necessary. I have never used Flickr, though I know a few who have.
So far I like the U.S. National Archives photostream a lot. Check out the newly-posted 1923 Hemingway passport photo! Let's face it-- we are mostly book and/or history nerds, and we find this stuff incredible. Segue: has anyone ever been to the Hemingway House in Key West? It's a fascinating place. Disclaimer: don't go if you're allergic to cats.
There are many intricacies and corners of Flickr to explore, of course. So far I like that images can be user-tagged, or tagged by viewers. I like that images can be saved as favorites without needing to be copied and/or saved. I also like that there are many groups based on some sort of intellectual or thematic relationship, and individual photographs can be uploaded to these groups from outside accounts.
I have reservations (as always) about the effectiveness of user tagging. This debate has raged through libraries and, to some extent, archives, regarding their bibliographic holdings, online catalogs, etc. User tags continue to be both useful in that they can create a better picture of the intellectual material of a resource (where a MARC record might not, as well), and facilitate access and use. On the other hand, tags are interpretive, and vague, and often disjointed, etc. You know the deal. So-- there's that. I love how the NYPL archives approached this problem:
The share potential on a site like this is phenomenal, however. And, if an institution has the resources to digitize photographs on a large scale, this seems like a wonderful (well connected!) venue on which to do so. Does it also promote the "needle in a haystack" search, though? Are images just lost on here? Perhaps this is inevitable. I can see the appeal though-- this is a photographic networking site. I am curious what everyone else thinks about this. Thoughts, folks?
This week poses many new challenges to Web 2.0 use (i.e., I did not have a Flickr account either). The reasons are manifold, but primarily hinge on the fact that my professional photographs are few. I am interested to see how archives and museums are using their Flickr accounts (primarily for publicity purposes?). My personal photos have been stored on a very large social network that shall remain Faceless, since I first went digital in college. As we talked about on our jaunt through social networking, it seems cumbersome for me to, at this time, reinvent myself professionally on social networks (as an individual I mean-- I think establishing an institutional presence on a social network is important) by creating multiple accounts for the same venue. That's what LinkedIn is for, no? But, similar to with my inquiry into the personal/professional line during professional networking (I shared a link to a LinkedIn string about keeping networking identities at least relatively separate) I (and everyone else, I am sure) have decided that mixing social and professional genres in photographs is equally laden with potential for faux pas. Thus, and forgive my serpentine route to this practically inevitable conclusion-- Tweeters, gasping-- I suppose creation of another account was necessary. I have never used Flickr, though I know a few who have.
So far I like the U.S. National Archives photostream a lot. Check out the newly-posted 1923 Hemingway passport photo! Let's face it-- we are mostly book and/or history nerds, and we find this stuff incredible. Segue: has anyone ever been to the Hemingway House in Key West? It's a fascinating place. Disclaimer: don't go if you're allergic to cats.
There are many intricacies and corners of Flickr to explore, of course. So far I like that images can be user-tagged, or tagged by viewers. I like that images can be saved as favorites without needing to be copied and/or saved. I also like that there are many groups based on some sort of intellectual or thematic relationship, and individual photographs can be uploaded to these groups from outside accounts.
I have reservations (as always) about the effectiveness of user tagging. This debate has raged through libraries and, to some extent, archives, regarding their bibliographic holdings, online catalogs, etc. User tags continue to be both useful in that they can create a better picture of the intellectual material of a resource (where a MARC record might not, as well), and facilitate access and use. On the other hand, tags are interpretive, and vague, and often disjointed, etc. You know the deal. So-- there's that. I love how the NYPL archives approached this problem:
"NYPL librarians have already spent a ton of time describing many of these photos, particularly with subject headings that relate the contents of the images. Rather than discard this information, we've added a selection of these headings, repurposed as tags, as a nucleus for everyone else to build from. The hope is that this will stimulate rather than stifle activity on the Commons, with librarians and non-librarians collaborating on the description of this material. " -from their profile on FlickrThough I liked the user guidelines to Flickr encouraging the community feel and the honest use of work, there is not really anything stopping someone from pulling these photos down. They are, at least according to the user agreement, theoretically safe from reposting on Flickr (under the threat of account revocation). However, they can still be downloaded or saved. The NYPL, for example, states that "The NYPL Digital Gallery provides free and open access to over 640,000 images digitized from the The New York Public Library's vast collections" (from their Flickr profile, also), but for a smaller, private institution, does photo sharing increase visibility but also potentially endanger property, copyright, etc.? I wonder if Flickr has a watermarking option, or if this has to be done on on photo editing software ahead of time. I am curious about these things.
The share potential on a site like this is phenomenal, however. And, if an institution has the resources to digitize photographs on a large scale, this seems like a wonderful (well connected!) venue on which to do so. Does it also promote the "needle in a haystack" search, though? Are images just lost on here? Perhaps this is inevitable. I can see the appeal though-- this is a photographic networking site. I am curious what everyone else thinks about this. Thoughts, folks?
Thursday, July 14, 2011
Thing 9: URL Shorteners
I have gotten behind; vacation will do that to a person. Or does it propel a person ahead? Hmmm. Philosophically riddle you this. But, what a time for catch up: URL shorteners!
URL shorteners... pretty self-explanatory, and equal parts useful and simple. Where microblogging services only allow a short string of characters in which to express a thought (and, often, to share a link), URL shorteners like tinyURL.com can take a very very long link-- like the address to a page that you had to click17 times to get to-- and turn it into "tinyURL.com/[code]", which is far more Tweetable, readable, Status updatable, usable.
I was going to Tweet about my love for the Wellesley Historical Society, but this website is in need of an overhaul. If I were not slaving away in the basement (oh, and and loving every second of it), I would work on the online media presence of this little gem. Buuuut the site is not actually complicated enough to warrant much URL shortening, for now. As for the collections...safety first. We have a lot of organizing to do before we start worrying about what the website is doing (not doing). I made my first Tweet about my work on the Worthen Collection at Cary Memorial Library in Lexington (MA), but the virtual exhibit is still in test stages and will not be online for at least another month. Linda Carroll, head reference and local history librarian, has done a fabulous job kickstarting it. The Worthen Collection pertains to Lexington history, and since Lexington (of The Battle of Lexington) is arguably the birthplace of our nation, there are some fascinating items floating around. It has been an historical wonder. I will be sure to tweet the link when the exhibit formally launches.
Short and sweet, just like tinyURL.com.
Have a great afternoon, everyone!
Bee
URL shorteners... pretty self-explanatory, and equal parts useful and simple. Where microblogging services only allow a short string of characters in which to express a thought (and, often, to share a link), URL shorteners like tinyURL.com can take a very very long link-- like the address to a page that you had to click17 times to get to-- and turn it into "tinyURL.com/[code]", which is far more Tweetable, readable, Status updatable, usable.
I was going to Tweet about my love for the Wellesley Historical Society, but this website is in need of an overhaul. If I were not slaving away in the basement (oh, and and loving every second of it), I would work on the online media presence of this little gem. Buuuut the site is not actually complicated enough to warrant much URL shortening, for now. As for the collections...safety first. We have a lot of organizing to do before we start worrying about what the website is doing (not doing). I made my first Tweet about my work on the Worthen Collection at Cary Memorial Library in Lexington (MA), but the virtual exhibit is still in test stages and will not be online for at least another month. Linda Carroll, head reference and local history librarian, has done a fabulous job kickstarting it. The Worthen Collection pertains to Lexington history, and since Lexington (of The Battle of Lexington) is arguably the birthplace of our nation, there are some fascinating items floating around. It has been an historical wonder. I will be sure to tweet the link when the exhibit formally launches.
Short and sweet, just like tinyURL.com.
Have a great afternoon, everyone!
Bee
Wednesday, July 13, 2011
Thing 8: MicroBlogging (Okay, Twitter)
Was that...? Did a pig just fly by the window?
Okay, I created a Twitter account. @Archivisitation.
For many years I have avoided this arguable inevitability, but under the tutelage of 23 Things for Archivists, I am giving in. My excitement is in the investment in professional networking, information networking, and visibility. My reservations come from time consumption and information overload. We will see how it goes.
I have followed @archivesnext and @archivist_org, and @JFKLibrary (in my hood), and @NEarchivists (New England Archivists) and I am interested to learn more about sharing information. Kate Theimer--writer for 23 Things for Archivists and progentress of Archivesnext, follows over 900 organizations and people pertaining to archives on Twitter. I am expected that @archivesnext will prove itself a valuable source of information. Thanks, Kate, for all your hard work.
As I was bopping around Twitter, I saw a tweet from @Salticidea, an RT by @archivesnext, about a scam from Google+ and now I'm curious after my last post about the Google Plus. Maybe it was a scam (?) I still haven't looked into it, but as always, folks, I would be reluctant to add applications to your Facebook.
I like the JFK Library's tweets, which are used to update on collections, events, etc. New England Archivists seem to use the account to send notices about meetings, or link to meeting minutes, etc. They post once every few days or so. I might like to see a litI tle more focus on highlighting collections, etc. But it doesn't look like a heavily-used account. The Museum of Fine Arts' @mfaboston has a very active account, providing updates on events, programming, funding, etc.
More exploration to come! I have a lot of account collecting to do.
Okay, I created a Twitter account. @Archivisitation.
For many years I have avoided this arguable inevitability, but under the tutelage of 23 Things for Archivists, I am giving in. My excitement is in the investment in professional networking, information networking, and visibility. My reservations come from time consumption and information overload. We will see how it goes.
I have followed @archivesnext and @archivist_org, and @JFKLibrary (in my hood), and @NEarchivists (New England Archivists) and I am interested to learn more about sharing information. Kate Theimer--writer for 23 Things for Archivists and progentress of Archivesnext, follows over 900 organizations and people pertaining to archives on Twitter. I am expected that @archivesnext will prove itself a valuable source of information. Thanks, Kate, for all your hard work.
As I was bopping around Twitter, I saw a tweet from @Salticidea, an RT by @archivesnext, about a scam from Google+ and now I'm curious after my last post about the Google Plus. Maybe it was a scam (?) I still haven't looked into it, but as always, folks, I would be reluctant to add applications to your Facebook.
I like the JFK Library's tweets, which are used to update on collections, events, etc. New England Archivists seem to use the account to send notices about meetings, or link to meeting minutes, etc. They post once every few days or so. I might like to see a litI tle more focus on highlighting collections, etc. But it doesn't look like a heavily-used account. The Museum of Fine Arts' @mfaboston has a very active account, providing updates on events, programming, funding, etc.
More exploration to come! I have a lot of account collecting to do.
Thing 7: Professional Networking
Oops. Looks like I jumped the gun on discussing LinkedIn on the last Thing. So HERE we are with professional networking. Different from social networking. I was actually trying to address the separation of personal and professional in the last Thing, and I ended up conflating discussion into one entry. I find this often happens in the world of online networking anyway, however, so we will let this one slide. Some overlap is inherent and inevitable, especially if a user is extremely active through both (or multiple) networks.
I am excited about this task, because, as I mentioned in Thing 6, I was actively working on my LinkedIn profile already. I just sent out an inquiry to someone who once offered to review resumes. While my employment status is currently active, I have had many changes in the past year-- pursuit of a Master's, internships, volunteer work, contractual employment in a historical society, additional professional memberships, etc., etc. In order to make a complete profile, I have been recently engaged in updating my resume as well-- a tall task in itself. This Thing, LinkedIn, is one to be carefully crafted and thoughtfully tended. Especially for those of us transitioning, or soon to be in transition, professional networking is an absolute must.
I have kicked off the account, but also have taken a lot of extra time crafting. The picture, surprisingly, was a bit of a project. I ended up taking one with my laptop at home and uploading it. In unrelated news, LinkedIn has an import option, which extracts data from an uploaded resume. I tried this also, but found that I really had to do more tweaking than it was worth to just hand-type. You know, formatting woes across platforms, always and forever.
LinkedIn wonderfully provides a venue for professional connectivity. However, as I am sure is the case with most everyone else as well, my friends started seeking me out for connections as soon as I created a profile. This melding of the personal and the professional leads to an interesting question: where do we draw that line? In an expose (accent on the "e"), of immaculate timing, there is, currently, a conversation going on through the ALA LinkedIn group on this exact topic. It's called, not shockingly, Personal/Professional Networking; is there a line between?, and it was started by user "Leif". You have to be a member to view it I believe, but why not join. We're all in the libraryish field, are we not? The group is open to join as long as you are able to state your purpose to the admin.
Most responses on this chain agree that accounts should be kept separate. It can be a challenge, though, especially when one ends up creating 14 accounts so that he or she can enjoy the connectivity of Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, SlideShare, and others, for both personal and professional networking. I was recently invited by a colleague to join "Google Plus" too, and to be perfectly honest, I have not even looked at what it is yet. I suppose I have to decide the nature of these accounts first, no? It seems overwhelming though, and it's definitely a bit of a philosophical battle as well-- be left behind, or be overwhelmed? Invisibility is death for a business, or library, or an archives, and perhaps it is so for a person as well (socially and professionally?). But, then, of course, time and resources must necessarily be expended to maintain all of the information sharing. I, for one, am going to take a deep breath and continue the expedition. If anyone has any Information Overload repellent packed in his Blog, do share.
Happy hunting, archivists!
I am excited about this task, because, as I mentioned in Thing 6, I was actively working on my LinkedIn profile already. I just sent out an inquiry to someone who once offered to review resumes. While my employment status is currently active, I have had many changes in the past year-- pursuit of a Master's, internships, volunteer work, contractual employment in a historical society, additional professional memberships, etc., etc. In order to make a complete profile, I have been recently engaged in updating my resume as well-- a tall task in itself. This Thing, LinkedIn, is one to be carefully crafted and thoughtfully tended. Especially for those of us transitioning, or soon to be in transition, professional networking is an absolute must.
I have kicked off the account, but also have taken a lot of extra time crafting. The picture, surprisingly, was a bit of a project. I ended up taking one with my laptop at home and uploading it. In unrelated news, LinkedIn has an import option, which extracts data from an uploaded resume. I tried this also, but found that I really had to do more tweaking than it was worth to just hand-type. You know, formatting woes across platforms, always and forever.
LinkedIn wonderfully provides a venue for professional connectivity. However, as I am sure is the case with most everyone else as well, my friends started seeking me out for connections as soon as I created a profile. This melding of the personal and the professional leads to an interesting question: where do we draw that line? In an expose (accent on the "e"), of immaculate timing, there is, currently, a conversation going on through the ALA LinkedIn group on this exact topic. It's called, not shockingly, Personal/Professional Networking; is there a line between?, and it was started by user "Leif". You have to be a member to view it I believe, but why not join. We're all in the libraryish field, are we not? The group is open to join as long as you are able to state your purpose to the admin.
Most responses on this chain agree that accounts should be kept separate. It can be a challenge, though, especially when one ends up creating 14 accounts so that he or she can enjoy the connectivity of Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, SlideShare, and others, for both personal and professional networking. I was recently invited by a colleague to join "Google Plus" too, and to be perfectly honest, I have not even looked at what it is yet. I suppose I have to decide the nature of these accounts first, no? It seems overwhelming though, and it's definitely a bit of a philosophical battle as well-- be left behind, or be overwhelmed? Invisibility is death for a business, or library, or an archives, and perhaps it is so for a person as well (socially and professionally?). But, then, of course, time and resources must necessarily be expended to maintain all of the information sharing. I, for one, am going to take a deep breath and continue the expedition. If anyone has any Information Overload repellent packed in his Blog, do share.
Happy hunting, archivists!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)