Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

AGM 2013 Task Force meetings


Published on

The outcomes from the morning's Task Force meetings.

Published in: Technology, Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

AGM 2013 Task Force meetings

  1. 1. TASK FORCE MEETINGS Europeana Network Annual General Meeting, December 2nd 2013
  3. 3. MAIN OUTCOMES  Scope for PPP should be more focused on key issues: • The value chain • From digitisation to re-use of data/content and back • Premium services and enrichment of data • The business model • The PAIN and GAIN • The value proposition • This is the next phase
  4. 4. NEXT STEPS  To pull in resources from: • Projects • National aggregators • Thematic aggregators • People • Organisations • Research • Creative industries  Framework
  6. 6. TF MEETING, 2 DEC 2013
  7. 7. MAIN OUTCOMES  Defining the problems • Awareness and reach • Fragmentation and need for coordination • Confusing aggregation model (domain/local/projects) • Standardising the standards by example • Questions around licencing possibilities  Lowering the barrier • ‘Get started’ guide • Dedicated information space for archival institutions on • Support desk for first steps (and before)
  8. 8. NEXT STEPS  Continue gathering relevant contents/existing documentation • On who is who and who’s doing what (Europeana, Archives Portal Europe and others) • On what the benefits are (succcess stories and use cases) • On what the preparatory steps would be (organisational and technical)  Come up with ‘easy guides’ • 1-2 page documents highlighting the main aspects  Create an ‘archives space’ • One entry point where one can find (all) essential information • To point interested institutions to • To be re-used by aggregators, projects etc. when addressing potential new content providers
  10. 10. MAIN OUTCOMES  Outlined some of the key issues preventing providers submission of high quality metadata  Identified the gaps in current policy and documentation  Definition of what metadata means in the context of the task force • Consistency of material e.g. submission format/vocabularies
  11. 11. NEXT STEPS  Assess appropriate metrics for metadata quality  Creation of improved documentation covering: • Basic metadata guidelines for data providers with increased explanations • Metadata check list for providers • What happens to submitted data • Standardisation of submission formats • Recommendations of controlled vocabularies  Next meeting to be held in January
  13. 13. MAIN OUTCOMES  Conducted an online questionnaire within the Europeana network  Performed in-depth interviews with stakeholders  Organized an expert workshop at Digital Heritage 2013  Main challenges for UGC • NOT technological, but: • How to engage audiences? • What is the surplus value for the stakeholders (users, curators)? • How to re-use user-generated content? • How to deal with LEGAL issues (licenses, moderation)?
  14. 14. NEXT STEPS  Turn the questionnaire/interviews/workshop into useable good practices for the network members • Structured descriptions of the use cases • Highlight outcomes and required inputs • Present means on how to engage users • Show the requirements of the stakeholders in the different projects  Explicitly include crowd-sourcing activities  Transfer the work of the task-force itself in a more structured format, e.g. as a project
  15. 15. Thank you If you would like to join or propose a Task Force, please email: