Hi Ben and Cristiano,

Many thanks for your very interesting replies on the question of the
forward development of information systems in museums. I apologise if I
gave the impression that we were necessarily looking at universal
integration - there is a fuller exposition of the core ideas of
integration and convergence in museum systems in my paper 'New Contexts
for Museum Information', which you can download from
http://www.collectionslink.org.uk/discover/manage-information/1241-new-c
ontexts-for-museum-information. 

All best, 

Nick


-----Original Message-----
From: Museums Computer Group [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
Cristiano Bianchi
Sent: 31 August 2012 10:18
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Low cost collections management solutions

Hi Ben,

what is the reason for resisting the idea of an integrated system, where
all (or most) museum information would be stored and could be retrieved
and integrated in a much easier and cost effective way than using APIs
and middleware? Is it a practical reason (e.g. legacy systems that are
difficult to get rid of and overcome)? Or a more ideological one? Or
both?

As you know, museums have been using vertical systems for years: every
time a new need emerge, the common approach is to acquire a new
application (sometimes checking it can be integrated with existing ones,
but not always). Commercial organisations like yours and mine help
museums merge these vertical applications into more integrated data
landscapes - e.g. making collections online more accessible by creating
narrative and interpretation through content management. For that, we
need to extract object data from the collection management system and
merge it with a content management system, to allow creating contextual
information (highlights, themes, trails, exhibitions, etc) - something
that is not always possible to do with the collection management
software.

The issue is: the two systems I mentioned (collection and content
management, as well as the many more that museums use) look very
different on the surface, but it would seem to me they all share the
same needs in terms of data management: relational databases with
digital asset management (I am not mentioning RDF on purpose - as that
can be applied later). On top of that, some applications will need
procedures and workflows, while others won't - but again, those are
simply more modules and relational data. This applies to every other
application a museum normally use - not simply to collection data. Of
course I am oversimplifying the issues, but probably not too much.

Why cannot a more modular approach and system be imagined, one which
museums may use to take care of all of their information (a true
museum's knowledge management system), instead of going on using
isolated applications, which are indeed getting more and more open and
accessible and can of course be integrated, but require considerable
cost and effort to do so?

Thank you,
Cristiano



On 30 Aug 2012, at 16:20, Ben Rubinstein <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> (Getting away somewhat from the original poster's question...)
> 
> On 30/08/2012 13:28, Nick Poole wrote:
>> I know that several larger UK museums are starting to think of their 
>> 'information landscape' and how they get value to flow across 
>> collections, documentation, digitisation, education, web and paper 
>> publishing, retail and licensing, conservation and other functions in

>> as seamless and integrated a way as possible.
> [snip]
>> To put it simply, over the next 10 years, museums are going to have 
>> to accept a lot more new data into their systems, and are going to be

>> asked to make it available, robustly and reliably through a lot more 
>> output channels.
> 
> I agree so far.
> 
>> It seems likely that most people will follow a path from partial 
>> integration to middleware to full systems integration and/or 
>> refactoring. I would really love to hear from people who have either 
>> found an alternative route, or are embarked on one of the approaches 
>> I've described above.
> 
> I'm less convinced about the end of that path.
> 
> Just as there isn't a single solution for collections management, not
least because the needs of a portrait collection differ from a general
fine art collection differ from a natural history collection etc; so I
don't think there will ever be a system no matter how modular that meets
the needs of all the different parts of an organisation - and I wouldn't
think such a monoculture would be healthy anyway.
> 
> It's much more plausible to assume that data that should be shared
outside the institution will always be managed through a variety of
different systems; and therefore that solutions for making that data
available will always need to involve some kind of middleware that
retrieves, connects and aggregates data to make it available downstream.
If not "always need to" then I'll at least go for "should" - even where
the landscape is simple enough that you could hook two systems together
by API, you have to assume that change is gonna come, and it's better to
build in fire-breaks and buffers.
> 
> APIs and XML and RDF and documentation standards and metadata exchange
standards are all good and useful parts of this, that help make
middleware solutions cheaper, more re-usable, more adaptable - but I
just don't believe in the single, covers everything, does everything,
integrated solution as the end point for many people's path.
> 
> warm regards,
> 
> Ben
> 
> ****************************************************************
>      website:  http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/
>      Twitter:  http://www.twitter.com/ukmcg
>     Facebook:  http://www.facebook.com/museumscomputergroup
> [un]subscribe:  http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/email-list/
> ****************************************************************

****************************************************************
       website:  http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/
       Twitter:  http://www.twitter.com/ukmcg
      Facebook:  http://www.facebook.com/museumscomputergroup
 [un]subscribe:  http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/email-list/
****************************************************************

****************************************************************
       website:  http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/
       Twitter:  http://www.twitter.com/ukmcg
      Facebook:  http://www.facebook.com/museumscomputergroup
 [un]subscribe:  http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/email-list/
****************************************************************