I quite agree, Mia.
I just want to pick up your point about 'silos of data', about whether
the reality of funding means our institutions are best served by keeping
visitors on our websites, and your suggestion that the sector really
needs to address this issue at some point.
You may have seen a while ago a tender to undertake the National
Collections Online Feasibility Study. This was intended to address the
issues of disaggregated collections spread across several legacy systems
and websites in the UK, to identify ways forward to help users
(internationally) to explore collections in more seamless and
personalised ways. Flow is now undertaking this study, and has invited a
few people to contribute to a 'community of enquiry'. I would like to
use the generosity of the MCG list to gather a broader range of views,
so will post the odd question over the next few months.
For the time being, I would be interested to know what people consider
to be a useful project, for example:
- if the lack of integrated national collections is a really important
issue to be tackling
- if you think any existing project is getting there already,
- or if you think there are more important issues
- or have diverse lateral ideas to tackle this issue.
If anyone wants to know more about the study, email me and I can tell
you more about the enquiry.
Best wishes
Bridget McKenzie
Director, Flow Associates
441 New Cross Road,
London, SE14 6TA
07890 540178
0208 691 6803
Skype: Bridget McKenzie
http://bridgetmckenzie.blogspot.com/
www.flowassociates.com
Ridge, Mia wrote:
> I'm reading this thread many days later, and I really should be out in the sunshine of Montreal, so this is a quick and dirty response...
>
> I say 'yes' to the sandbox. The degree of control over IT infrastructure varies hugely between museums, to the extent that many smaller museums don't even have their own IT infrastructure but rely on a local council for IT services. Assuming most museums are Windows based, very few would also have the resources to run a Linux/Apache/MySQL/PHP-Perl server too, or vice versa; and very few IT managers I know would be happy to let unknown software run on a production server.
>
> I see the benefits of a sandbox as being a space where you don't have to put in a purchase order and go to a committee and wait six months to install an new application so you can set up a test blog for a curator; or where you could install a wiki and see if a group of volunteers are comfortable using it to record their research. Or even where you could dump your catalogue records and those of the museum in the next town into a database and see how your data might play together.
>
> I'd also be interested in finding ways for those experimenting in the sandbox to work together and share the lessons learnt. Our different institutions have different audiences and collections who may be best served by a specialist interface, but we need to stop building silos of data, and as others have said, we need to think about whether we're best serving our users by keeping them on our individual websites. (On the other hand, what if the reality of funding means that our institutions are best served by keeping visitors on our websites? The sector really needs to address this issue at some point.)
>
> In terms of the rest of the discussion - I think we're at risk of subscribing to a false dichotomy. I don't think anyone is suggesting abandoning existing projects to run away and play with the AJAX fairies. We're clever enough (and have hopefully learnt the lessons from the past well enough) to build on existing systems but to build them *better*. As well as getting our core business of providing access to collections and knowledge right (whether that's basic catalogue-y or shiny pretty microsite-y stuff), we can also provides hooks so that our data plays well with more experimental technologies.
>
> If we aim to make all our digital publication projects interoperable, re-usable and sustainable, we're helping our future selves as consumers of our own data as well as others. If we're lucky, we'll get to play with experimental technologies ourselves - if not, by getting the basic building blocks right at least our data is available for others to use.
>
> cheers, Mia
>
>
>
>
> Mia Ridge
> Database Developer, Museum Systems Team
> Museum of London Group
> 46 Eagle Wharf Road
> London. N1 7ED
> Tel: 020 7410 2205 / 020 7814 5723
> Fax: 020 7600 1058
> Email: [log in to unmask]
> www.museumoflondon.org.uk
> Museum of London is changing; our lower galleries will be closed while they undergo a major new development. Visit www.museumoflondon.org.uk to find out more.
> London's Burning - explore how the Great Fire of London shaped the city we see today www.museumoflondon.org.uk/londonsburning
> Before printing, please think about the environment
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Museums Computer Group on behalf of Nick Poole
> Sent: Sun 30/03/2008 6:29 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: The speculative aspect of using Web 2 [was: British Postal Museum & Archive Wiki]
>
> Must....stop....replying...to...thread....
>
> Echoing (I think) everybody, there is no such thing as Web 2.0 - which makes it the perfect fodder for this kind of email discussion.
>
> Without getting into Definition War, currently it really is a pretty unresolved jumbalaya of different technologies, applications, services, business models, licensing models, user behaviours and design elements.
>
> Hence the new Subject Line this discussion acquired is self-referential - participating in the development of Web 2.0 is always going to be speculative, because it simply doesn't exist (I think it is *brilliant*, by the way, that some technologists are already losing their buzz on Web 2.0 and starting in on Web 3.0....)
>
> Which makes it all the more peculiar (or perhaps more understandable) that this discussion so quickly becomes sectarian.
>
> Parodying wildly - in the blue corner, we have the Web 2.0 believers for whom phrases like 'perpetual beta' and 'distributed web' are not only comfortable, but also well-defined and axiomatic.
>
> Over here in the red corner, we have the Web 2.0 skeptics, who believe that we haven't yet finished the last learning curve, and that perhaps we should keep our powder dry and get the basics right rather than leaping on the next one - particularly when so many bits of it are untested or ill-defined.
>
> The blues, eyeing the reds, wonder why we are so slow and dumb - why can't we see the great land of opportunity glinting over the next horizon. Why must we sit on this content when it longs to be free? Ah well, no matter, those of us that can't adapt, will die.
>
> The reds (hey, it may just be me, but it's my analogy) look at the blues and think 'how can you be so naïve'? Low cost of entry? We were promised that with Open Source Software and it turned out to be no cheaper. Reaching audiences while we sleep? They told us Z39.50 and interoperability would solve that and we're still not there. Content Management will make everyone a publisher? You just try and get a username and password out of the Council IT Admin.
>
> The real, deep, issue here is that we as museums always seem to be on the back foot - reacting to whichever technology comes along, testing things speculatively and never resolving to services with a life-span of more than 3 years (I can't tell you by the way, from a business administration point of view how *desperately* unhealthy a 'perpetual beta' is).
>
> I have always argued for a process where we identify our target markets (audiences if you prefer), work out what we're trying to sell (give) them and then - from a position of wisdom - make at least a medium-term commitment to a core set of technologies which deliver *those* things to *those* people in stable, quality-assured ways. That remains our end goal and I suppose if I get polemic about some of these technology discussions, it's because I think they are a distraction rather than a step along the way.
>
> Nick
>
> Nick Poole
> Chief Executive
> MDA
>
> www.mda.org.uk
> www.collectionslink.org.uk
>
>
>
> Tel: 01223 316028
> Fax: 01223 364658
>
> MDA (Europe) Ltd: Company Registration No: 1300565
> Reg. Office: 22 Hills Road, Cambridge, CB2 1JP.
>
> **************************************************
> For mcg information and to manage your subscription to the list, visit the website at http://www.museumscomputergroup.org.uk
> **************************************************
>
> **************************************************
> For mcg information and to manage your subscription to the list, visit the website at http://www.museumscomputergroup.org.uk
> **************************************************
>
>
>
>
**************************************************
For mcg information and to manage your subscription to the list, visit the website at http://www.museumscomputergroup.org.uk
**************************************************
|
