IS&T Archiving Conference CURATEcamp 2013

From CURATEcamp
Revision as of 15:32, 4 April 2013 by Meg Phillips (talk | contribs)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

We are organizing a Condensed CURATEcamp in association with IS&T Archiving 2013.

When? Tuesday, April 2, 2013

What time? 1:15 – 5:30 pm

Where? The National Archives, Washington DC ("Archives I")

The theme is "Digitized / Born Digital Together."

Megan Phillips, Kate Murray, and Mike Horsley, of NARA will be facilitating, but if others experienced with the format would like to help facilitate, too, please get in touch!


CURATEcamp Set Up

1:15 - Convene in Jefferson Room: Welcome and logistics

1:25 - Propose and post discussion ideas on the schedule grid [1]

1:45 - Consolidate, rearrange, finalize schedule grid [2]

Session 1

Adams: Open Access: DRAFT: tsumani is coming (open up media file for public domain use). If that is environment we live in, provide authentic copy/version with metadata

Jefferson 1: Cooperative digital curation and crowdsourcing: DRAFT: People trying to do more and leverage resources of users and other institutions. Various projects: Galaxy view (sp?). How do people feel about bring crowdsourced data back into institution? Denmark project about farm photots just released. TV ads (?) Retirees writing more information. Collaborative tools. Using shared standards for APIs, Hydra - can share tools ..... Sharing data and distributed infrastructure. Product might be outline or registry of shared tools. "Spunky nerds" - interested technical parties that could help. What is outsourced/in-house? What are pros and cons? [[3]]

Jefferson 2: Rights issues and privacy: DRAFT: concrete issues around publishing digitized material when can't go back to contact copyright holders. Discussion on different laws in different countries: moral, ethical issues around access. Differences in copyright laws and preservation programs in different countries, like Canada's change in surrogates status (?)

Washington: Curating incoming digital material/accessing born digital material/digitally acquired material: Discussion notes

Madison - Laser scanning / 3D data: DRAFT: Laser scanning to make models but what happens to data over time? Simulation data of seismic data over time. Massive data sets - 100 GB per object, proprietary software, rapid changes, responsibility. Conclusions: for cultural heritage institutions don't have resources so dependent on science or industry to develop standards. But does it need to be preserved? What to keep? Who can make the decisions?


3:00 - 3:30 - Soft drinks will be available at 3:15

Session 2

Adams: Records management and electronic records preservation: DRAFT: Concept to mesh RM and electronic records preservation. No consensus on answers. Some federal agencies are working on e-discovery including auto-catagorization such as email parsing (needs to be cost effective and meet electronic records preservation standards). Issues: privacy rights and legal issues. Need additional funding. Lifecycle management. Big data research might be relevant. May be an opportunity to include 508 compliance within projects.

Jefferson 1: DRAFT Formats/normalization: unidentifiable formats. use case - data coming from sensor but can't be identified. Can expose problem files to developers to have them improve tools. Also, knowledge base problem. People can contribute to format registries to improve knowledge but not enough people working on problem. When formats are proprietary and often lack documentation. Normalization - good or bad? Situational. Content might warrant it or email format might be too difficult to deal with so normalize. Raw formats are good to keep but might need to be normalized. Transformation: what is lossless transformation? Discussion notes

Jefferson 2: Integrity and authenticity in digitized/born digital material: DRAFT: Authenticity discussion. Why is it hard to deal with? Outcomes: Is there varying degrees of authenticity (like "trusted")? Is it reasonable to think that a copy be authentic across all domains? Maybe the best we can do is document processes/decisions and leave it up to others to judge if copy is authentic for purpose?

Washington: Role of archives, info and RM managers in cyberwarfare: SESSION DID NOT HAPPEN

Madison: How to preserve look and feel/user centered design: DRAFT: Damaged originals must be digitized so how to maintain look and feel? How to replicate experience of using original source material? How to emulate user experience? If changes are made, it as close to original as possible let user decide what to do. Processes and workflows: document tools and processes so everyone knows what to do when. Share successful workflows. When to let end user in: Fail often and fail fast. End users can tell you if you are on the right track.

Wrap Up

4:30 - 5:20 - Reconvene in Jefferson. Each discussion has 5 minutes to report out

5:20 - 5:30 - Closing remarks


Possible Discussion Topics: Add yours here!

There were some interesting suggestions left over after the iPres CURATEcamp. See:

We also brainstormed some ideas that appear below. What do YOU want to ask/brainstorm about/present/discuss? What is keeping you up at night?

Details on the CURATEcamp and on how to register for the Archiving 2013 conference and the CURATEcamp are available here: [4]

A CURATEcamp brings individuals together to discuss topics they define. For this special condensed version, the theme is Digitized / Born Digital Together. The theme was selected to take advantage of Archiving 2013’s rich combination of experts— those working in imaging and digital curation within the cultural, academic, and industry sectors.

The “unconference” format of CURATEcamp encourages attendees to identify and discuss the issues they care about the most, leading to progress on solving real problems. Two key ideas are that participants define the agenda and that there are no spectators. Everyone who comes should plan on actively participating in and helping to lead discussions.

Possible topics might include:

• Are there necessary differences in processes for managing born digital and digitized objects?

• Does one size fit all, or “I’m ok, you’re ok” with different traditions, processes, and systems?

• Can organizational cultures be formed around a single comprehensive vision for how physical, digital, and digitized materials can all be made accessible to the public in the most useful way?

• How can institutions get the most value from their resources when managing both types of material?

• How can we make all our processes more efficient and scalable?

• What are possible roles of crowdsourcing in extending our resources for both types of material?

• Could we develop tools for digital curation and let the crowd do some of the actual work using those tools?

Attendees are encouraged to start thinking now about topics related to this theme that they would like to propose for discussion. The options for rich discussions are endless!

Registration Info

Registration will be handled by IS&T so use the registration form available on the Archiving 2013 web page. [5]

Please note: Participation is limited to 75 people; advanced registration is required. There is no charge for this event if you register along with Archiving 2013 by the early-registration deadline. If you register after March 4, the fee is $35.

Although the event is open to all, priority is given to those who register for the full conference by March 3 on a first-come first served basis. Those who register only for CURATECAMP by March 3 will be put on a waiting list until March 4. After March 4, all space is first-come/first-served.

There is no onsite registration for this event.