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.
Sarah Hatoum
Kate Palm
Zinia Rahman
What is Crowdsourcing?
- Crowdsourcing is characterized by the voluntary participation...
Cataloging music has many unique areas of
difficulty
- Multiple formats - Multiple titles
- Audio and print often come in
...
Managing “Born Digital”
Karen Gaines, Bridget Gavlin, Cassie Hickman
Types of Born-Digital Materials
Defining “Born Digita...
Folksonomies: The New Age Classification
What is a folksonomy?
According to Thomas Vander Wal, a folksonomy is
a user gene...
LIS 653 Posters Fall 2014
LIS 653 Posters Fall 2014
LIS 653 Posters Fall 2014
LIS 653 Posters Fall 2014
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

LIS 653 Posters Fall 2014

567 views

Published on

  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

LIS 653 Posters Fall 2014

  1. 1. Sarah Hatoum Kate Palm Zinia Rahman What is Crowdsourcing? - Crowdsourcing is characterized by the voluntary participation of a crowd to describe, obtain, share ideas and solutions (Estellés-Arolas & González-Ladrón-de-Guevara, 2012). - Cultural institutions use crowdsourcing for “knowledge discovery and management” (Kopeck, 2014). References Estellés-Arolas, E., González-Ladrón-de-Guevara, F. (2012). Towards an integrated crowdsourcing definition. Journal of Information Science, 38(2): 189–200. doi:10.1177/0165551512437638 Holley, R. (March/April 2010). Crowdsourcing: How and why should libraries do it? DLIB Magazine. http://www.dlib.org/dlib/march10/holley/03holley.html Holley, R. (2012, Feb. 11). Crowdsourcing: More cool sites to give libraries, archives and museums inspiration. [Blog]. Retrieved from: http://rose-holley.blogspot.com/2012/02/crowdsourcing-more-cool-sites-to-give.html Kopec, K. D. (2014). Is crowdsourcing a model for cultural institutions? The Case of Polish GLAM Projects. The Internet, Policy & Politics Conferences. Poland. Tisch Oomen, J. & Aroyo, L. (2011). Crowdsourcing in the cultural heritage domain: opportunities and challenges. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Communities and Technologies (C&T '11). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 138-149. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/2103354.2103373 ner European University in Krakow. Owens, T. (2013, April 3). The metadata games crowdsourcing toolset for libraries & archives: An interview with Mary Flanagan. [Blog]. Retrieved from: Blog LOC.gov Classification - Collect simple metadata via social tagging at scale to create folksonomies - Add user-created content to collections MetaData Games (metadatagames.org) Professor Pattuelli LIS 653-02, Fall 2014 Complementing Collection - Call for additional objects/materials to enhance an exhibit or collection - Gather citations to improve bibliography for an area of knowledge Description - Draw upon scholars and experts to assist in cataloging materials from special collections U.S. National Archives GLAMs (Galleries, Libraries, Archives, Museums) & Crowdsourcing - shares archived material - builds a user-friendly collection - allows greater access across different generations and cultures - leverages cost-effective subject expertise of crowd Museum of Broken Relationships Transcription - Invite users to edit and/or transcribe materials that have been digitized Sample Projects Classification: ✹ Metadata Games & Steve.museum (social tagging) ✹ Your Paintings Tagger (subject tags for UK’s collection of oil paintings) ✹ Flickr Commons ✹ U.S. Nat’l Archives (tag images & records) Description: ✹ U. of Michigan’s Islamic Manuscripts Project (cataloging) ✹ Penn Libraries’ Provenance Online Project (tag and comment on provenance images in Flickr to improve knowledge of past owners) Transcription: ✹ U.S. Nat’l Archives ✹ NYPL What’s On the Menu Complementing Collection: ✹ Museum of Broken Relationships (add personal stories) ✹ Database of the Smokies (gather citations) ✹ U.S. Nat’l Archives P.O.P. (http://provenanceonlineproject.wordpress.com/about/) GLAMs & Crowdsourcing
  2. 2. Cataloging music has many unique areas of difficulty - Multiple formats - Multiple titles - Audio and print often come in collections - Usually searched by format/genre, not subject - Books about music vs. Music manuscripts Different solutions have been arrived at, both at national and local levels - The Dewey Decimal System does not separate manuscripts from books, and classes all materials between 780 and 789. - Library of Congress Class-M includes: ● M 1-5000 for music scores ● ML 1-3910 for books on music ● MT 1-960 for education and instruction - Alpha-Numeric System for Classification of Sound Recordings (ANSCR) was devised for audio items to be browsable. Fall 2014 Dr. Pattuelli LIS-653-02 Janelle Varin Megan Beck Caroline Evanson Multimedia Cataloging: Music, Film, and Web 2.0 Cataloging film has been historically difficult - relative newness of material - multiple versions problem Beginning in the 1930s, organizations on the national and local level worked towards standardization of film cataloging, but no real solutions found until the 1960s. DDC and LCC do not have large sections dedicated to film and related subjects - Information is spread out and hidden within other subjects RDA and FRBR address multiple versions problem Challenges in cataloging digital information from Web 2.0 - no standard model for assigning value to content - more interest in creating than archiving data - dated copyright laws result in limitations “Keep everything, worry about it later” - considering archival process from the beginning by catalog entire process of a project Library of Congress’s Twitter archival project - acquire and preserve 2006-10 tweets - 170 billion tweets cataloged as of January 2013 Classification tools for organizing and connecting multimedia data - metadata - taxonomies and folksonomies Cataloging multimedia items presents several challenges, especially in an evolving digital age. The challenges and trends in cataloging these resources, in both traditional and electronic form, are presented below. http://www.freeimageslive.co.uk/free_stock_image/cdclassicalmusicjpg http://bitshare.cm/post/2082365481/the-film-industry-is-big-business-infograph http://g3ict.org/resource_center/newsletter/news/p/id_500
  3. 3. Managing “Born Digital” Karen Gaines, Bridget Gavlin, Cassie Hickman Types of Born-Digital Materials Defining “Born Digital” “Born Digital”: Items originally created and managed in digital form. “Born Digital” is not: ● Analog material converted or reformatted into digital format Erway’s 4 Essential Principles 1. Do no harm (to the physical media or the content). 1. Don’t do anything that unnecessarily precludes future action and use. 1. Don’t let the first two principles be obstacles to action. 1. Document what you do. Further InformationTypes of Born-Digital Materials Example Cataloging Methods ● Dublin Core ○ 15 optional elements, faceted ● PBCore ○ Used for video, audio, text, images and interactive learning objects for television, radio, and Web activities ● METS ○ Open standard, XML encoding format used for digital text and images Images Image source: multimedia.journalism.berkeley.edu LIS 653-03 Knowledge Organization Professor Christina Pattuelli Fall 2014 Managing “Born Digital” Karen Gaines, Bridget Gavlin, Cassie Hickman Types of Born-Digital Materials Defining “Born Digital” “Born Digital” is: Items originally created and managed in digital form. “Born Digital” is not: Analog material converted or reformatted into digital format Types of Born-Digital Materials LIS 653-03 Knowledge Organization Professor Christina Pattuelli Fall 2014 Erway’s 4 Essential Principles of Managing Born-Digital Content 1. Do no harm (to the physical media or the content). 2. Don’t do anything that unnecessarily precludes future action and use. 3. Don’t let the first two principles be obstacles to action. 4. Document what you do.Image source: multimedia.journalism.berkeley.edu Cataloging Example Catalog Example: Library of Congress
  4. 4. Folksonomies: The New Age Classification What is a folksonomy? According to Thomas Vander Wal, a folksonomy is a user generated taxonomy. Folksonomies allow for the personal classification of online content by the user, the opportunity to share with other users, and information retrieval. A folksonomy is uncontrolled; users are able to apply tags using their vocabulary based on their own meaning and understanding of the content. Pros and cons: Folksonomies do not rely on a complicated schedule to sort information, so finding the data you need is as easy as looking up a specific term. However, this also works against the system, as all of the terms one can search for are subjective to each individual user. Thomas Vander Wal, 2005 Folksonomy Text Cloud http://www.tumblr.com http://www.librarything.com A possible approach: Movahedian and Khayyambashi, two computer engineers, have developed an ontological approach to improving recommendations based on folksonomies and user ratings. Because the language of folksonomies can vary greatly, these scholars attempt to find underlying meanings of tags and map them to onotological concepts. These concepts are used to decipher the user’s likes and dislikes, therefore, providing more reliable recommendations. Movahedian and Khayyambashi, 2014 Broad Vs. Narrow Folksonomies: Broad folksonomies have many people tagging the same object with numerous tags. Narrow folksonomies have one or few people tagging the same object with a singular term; one tag per term. Brian Engel, Nanyamkah Mars, Chelsea Patella How they’re used today: Folksonomies are used on many websites, mainly those of social media. Sites such as Flickr, Tumblr, Twitter, and many others rely on users for the classification of their posts. Tumblr describes the use of tags as a way to “make it easier for readers to find posts about a specific topic on [a] blog,” and to find posts, the user can just “type things in and hit enter.” References: How to use tags. Retrieved from https://www.tumblr.com/docs/en/using_tags Movahedian, Hamed and Mohammad Reza Khayyambashi. “Folksonomy-based user interest and disinterest profiling for improved reccomendations: An ontological approach.” Journal of Information Science 40.5 (2014): 594-610. Print. Schachter, Joshua How tags exploit the self-interest of individuals to organize the Web for everyone 2006 http://www2.technologyreview.com/tr35/Profile.aspx?TRID=432&Cand=T&pg=1 A short introduction to LibraryThing. Retrieved from http://www.librarything.com/quickstart.php Vander Wal, T. (2005, February 21). Explaining and Showing Broad and Narrow Folksonomies. Retrieved from http://www.vanderwal.net/random/entrysel.php?blog=1635 Vander Wal, T. (2007, February 2). Folksonomy Coinage and Definition. Retrieved from http://vanderwal.net/folksonomy.html LibraryThing is a website which allows users to “catalog [their] books from Amazon, Library of Congress, and 700 other world libraries.” This website emphasizes the use of tagging and offers features such as “word clouds” of tags and authors in one’s library, “tag mirrors” where one can see what others are tagging the same item, and a collection of all LibraryThing tags. http://www.Tumblr.com 653 Knowledge Organization Dr. Cristina Patuelli Fall 2014 Key Image 1

×