We associate it with plenty of positive words….We feel that it goes hand-in-hand with changes in communication and technology
Seems that we are starting to embrace the philosophy of open. We increasingly understand the value of working with data; understanding data, and how important it is for all of us as citizens.
It is becoming an embedded idea. Who would have thought a govt site would have an introduction to Linked Data so promiment? And of course, just a week or so ago,the European Parliament formally adopted the updated directive on the reuse of public sector information - documents and metadata are to be made available for reuse under open standards and using machine readable formats. This includes archives, although it only covers what is already legally public. This follows the approval of the draft text in April
This is good because: Open data provides an opportunity to show so much more of our potential…the potential for more explorationMaximise investment (although if talking in terms of financial maximisation, maybe a little more complicated)
It encourages us to bypass human intervention and bureaucracy
It can open up channels through data, avoiding dead-ends and helping us to end up with more connections.
It encourages exploration of different data and datasets in order to further our knowledge and understanding
Things may be used in unexpected ways – ways we may find postiive…or negative.
Linked open data – blowin’ in the wind!
Crediting to the most detailed level might prove a little impractical!
With all these advantages its no wonder that we are seeing more and more open educational resources
We have the advent of the MOOC (a re-brand maybe, but the scale is much greater than before).
We have many many institutions, organisations, projects and initiatives promoting open approaches
Very active initiatives – archive professionals not always well represented even if these are about opening up our data!
It’s easy to paint the idea of a beautiful world through the open data door. Our data opens up and we create beautiful things!
Web was provided free – amazing thing! Now go one step further to really unlock potential.
Ardiuno: from cat feeder to a mute that works when annoying people are on the TV! Great example of innovation and creativity.
What are the barrriers? 1. legal – but it is encouraging to see that rather than responding to FoI requests, momentum towards open data so people can easily access it themselves
2. Generating income. The trouble is, the open movement seem like the good guys, but for many of us, the income we get though things like reproductions of images is important.
So, it is worth looking closely at major initiatives like the Rijksmuseum, where they are providing good quality images of their beautiful artworks. In a way forced to do this otherwise people use the images anyway, but poor quality ones.
How much research has there been on whether opening up our collections actually creates more revenue in the long term? Because of course we can provide images in a lower (but still effective) resolution online and people may be more encouraged to buy good quality reproductions. There are various options, rather than not showing images at all…..
Remember that saying data is open doesn’t necessarily help if its not practically open, i.e. easy to find, easy to use.
Europeana have been at the forefront of promoting open data…. And they have been able to promote the idea of open and trusted – both together. Aggregation in support of knowledge transfer and innovation.
Thereis a difference between our ‘stuff’ – our archives – and our metadataWhy should we be afraid to open up our metadata? This is what advertises our collections.
Metadata advertises the product. Tells you what it is; why its important; why you might want to use it. Map to the treasure!
In the end we must do our best to work for end users. We don’t know who our users are and what they want. No matter how many surveys we carry out, or how much community engagement we engage it, we will never really get a good picture of our users’ needs because we are in a global and digital environment and because archives are there for the long-term. It’s impossible to know. This is the new reality. The only way we can try to meet needs is by providing flexible access to data.
What are the dangers? Our data might be misunderstood; it might be used for spurious or even immoral purposes. But it might be used for great and hugely beneficial purposes. We can’t control of how data is used and we have to support the idea of public participation – the democratisation of data. Democracy gives everyone a voice, even if we may not agree, it brings things into the open. In this world, anyone can say anything about anything.
It is a big problem is that the law is way behind reality, and reality composed of big data, huge processing power, social networks, etc. So, for example, if all data is opened up individuals may be identifiable
Certainly there are times when privacy is considered to be very reasonable. I think that those who end up sounding like ‘open fundamentalists’ may not be helping the cause.
We have to work within the law (of course) but we should try to take an informed view about how it can be changed for the better and how best to work in the meantime. One of the best things to do: make the licence explicit. Think about it!
Next best thing: use a commonly applied licence. Think ‘open’ by default and work from there.
Dr Jean Dryden has undertaken researchinto archivists’ approaches to dealing with copyright restrictions. There’s a lot of caution in the community about putting things online and accidentally infringing copyright, but there have been no instances in North America of archives being sued for putting images online: any disputes have been settled amicably. Dr Dryden advocates a risk management approach.
It will be essential to make sure that the rules, tools and norms which emerge are both lightweight and pragmatic.Danger of data providers setting up various hoops – confusing, baffling and counter=productive. Really just want ability to point back to the source. But we have to avoid ‘attribution stacking’. where datasets are modified and therefore attribution could build up to a ridiculous degree. Have to decide what the priority is, and if it is getting a wider community to engage with your data then you can’t put impractical barriers in the way. Attribution has to be simple.
Open is with us – horse has bolted already.
Open Images, a Netherlands based initiative – open platform that encourages reuse – 68% increase in unique visitors to Open Images webpages (http://www.openimages.eu/)
People like Tim Sherrat are doing great things but you can sometimes feel like “using anything other than the supplied interfaces is bad” (ADA2013 session). Not just a question of law but of culture, politics,language and rhetoric. What do we mean by ‘access’? Invisible Australians – compelling, challenging, discomforting and moving. Copyright? Unsure. Maybe it contravenes copyright. But ‘look beyond current set of problems to find a better set of problems’ and in this case it is the sense of responsibility to these people and how we should react and act. Maybe this is more worth our intellectual energy. Difficult questions when we seek more and maybe when we hack interfaces. Taking access rather than just taking what is given. Access as an act of resistence.
Slovenia project is looking at genocide (Spomenik) – the 1950s Stalinist purges – using a database that existed.
Archives are measured (and funded) on how well they perform their required mission of access to and engagement with their collection. To open a collection to digital use and reuse is to enter a whole new world of reportable performance enhancement.
ALicence to Thrill
The Exciting Potential of Open Data
Jane Stevenson, The Archives Hub
by Patriiciiaa suga
“Scholarly communications is changing, and changing rapidly.
Technological developments have expanded the potential range
of dissemination of research and the delivery mechanisms, with
researchers expecting any-time, anywhere access.”
Ithaka S+R | Jisc | RLUK, UK Survey of Academics 2012
Dark Full page image Title
Promotes a philosophy and practice
requiring that data be freely available to
everyone, without restrictions from
copyright, patents or other mechanisms of
control. Licences to reuse are
acceptable, but not licences that restrict
“The things that have happened with the Web have really blown
us away; they are much more than we initially imagined.”
…There is still huge potential to unlock…”
“[If] it’s all open source you don’t need anybody’s
permission to create something great”
An open source 3D printer.
Arduino: an open-source
electronics prototyping platform
• UK Freedom of Information Act, 2000
• Germany, freedom of information
• Norway, freedom of information
• EU right of access to European
parliament, Council and Commission
documents, 2000 & 2001
• etc, etc.
“My…research examines the ways in which copyright
may inappropriately be a barrier to online
access….My research has found that memory
institutions are more cautious than copyright law
requires when digitizing their holdings and making
them available online.”
“Products, recommendations, decisions and
entire businesses are being constructed on
top of data sourced from [elsewhere].
Without an understanding of where that data
came from, and how it was
collected, interpreted or maintained, all of
those products, recommendations, decisions
and businesses stand upon very shaky
Paul Miller, Cloud of Data http://cloudofdata.com/2013/05/getting-it-right-with-data-attribution/
cartoon by Adams from the Sunday Telegraph
We should proactively seek to create positive
This doesn’t mean everything has to be open.
It means open is generally a good thing.
It means we must engage in the debate.
It means we try to do what is in the interests of
research, knowledge and understanding.