1 / 16

Federated Social History Archives: a case study on HOPE Gabriella Ivacs, ivacsg @ceu.hu

Federated Social History Archives: a case study on HOPE Gabriella Ivacs, ivacsg @ceu.hu ECCHRD Conference, Berlin May 1 0, 2012. Features of the Global Archives. Instead of re-active , increa si ngly proactive Instead of context , emphasis on content itself

ryan-franks
Download Presentation

Federated Social History Archives: a case study on HOPE Gabriella Ivacs, ivacsg @ceu.hu

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Federated Social History Archives: a case study on HOPE Gabriella Ivacs, ivacsg@ceu.hu ECCHRD Conference, Berlin May 10, 2012

  2. Features of the Global Archives • Instead of re-active, increasingly proactive • Instead of context, emphasis on content itself • Instead of central control, networked institutions • Instead of juridical-administrative role, socially-legitimized archives • Instead of provenance, themes, subjects, remix • Instead of impartial, increasingly involved agents • Instead of guardian, new business models

  3. Archives under attack Funding bodies, institutions Policy makers, legislators User, researchers

  4. HOPE (2010-2013): Heritage of People’s Europe • Domain: 12 social history institutions; libraries and archives • Content: digital collections and metadata; a range of content types and formats; multilingual content • Target Community: social history researchers, European citizens, global public • Management: HOPE Consortium > IALHI Foundation • Funding: by CIP ICT PSP Programme

  5. The HOPE objectives • Aggregate metadata and make social history collections visible => Europeana, IALHI portal, social sites (Flickr, Youtube) • Establish a Shared (Digital) Object Repository (SOR) which serves as a secure storage for all institutions • Improve the quality of descriptions, finding aid, catalog records, e.g. item-level descriptions, EAD, MARCXML, LIDO standards • Engage social history institutions and create best practices: data curation, digital assests management, digitization, repository etc.

  6. How does Europeana work? www.europeana.eu More than 20 million digitised photos, texts, audio and video objects can be researched with the search engine and are linked.

  7. HOPE survey: standards

  8. Hope Architecture: OAIS compliant federated model

  9. HOPE discovery to delivery (d2d) model AGGREGATION OAI-PMHXML HarvestingCleaning All content providers - See Table 0 in Dow HOPE Schema Data Curation Service UI Index Multilingual Index INDEXING & SEARCH STORAGE …… MetadataStore External Interfaces HOPEShared Object Repository OAI-PMH, OAI-ORE, SRW Europeana, Social Sites & Institutional Sites IALHI Portal

  10. Local repository (LOR): OSAImplementation

  11. OSA New Data Model

  12. Short-term achievements by HOPE • Interoperability: • Cross-domain Data Model / Schema • Normalization key values: types, dates, countries, language, Europeana rights statements • Shared Authority Files: names, places, concepts • Persistent Identifier: Handle System • Enhanced Access: • Themes and Collections Tagging • Support for Multilingual Metadata • Dissemination Policies: filter content to selected discovery services

  13. Issues unresolved: Access, Rights, IPR • Solicitation: • solicit documents at the end of their life-cycle – accretion of stakeholders, many “orphan” works. • constraints on access: IPR, privacy / 3rd party data protection, donor rights, and institutional policy. • Collection Management: • ascendant domain standards support limited structured rights metadata; new schemas for digital only. • Dissemination: • no standard licenses for reuse of cultural heritage content; licensing of cataloguing data problematic.

  14. Unresolved Issues: Preservation and sustainibility • Long-term Access (OAIS) • Ensure accessibility through technological means, migration, emulation, open formats, file registry locally and in the federated model • Policy Framework (TDRs) • Introduce trusted digital repository audit toolkits: Drambora, Track, digital curation suite locally and in the federated model • Dissemination: • Manage dissemination, reproduction services, web payment

  15. Policy issues to think about • Business models and its implications for scholarship and innovation • Tension between short-access and long-term access, artificial dichotomy in funding schemes • Tension between high level policy making and local realities: EU and national level • Affirmative actions on social inclusion • Affirmative actions on specific domains • Penalties on restricted access to public domain material • Changing the IPR Law exception based doctrine

  16. Aggregated or federated archives? .

More Related