Hey Liam, i'm glad that you're openly stating all the problems. It's always better to be transparent in these kinds of situations.
Anyways, considering the next steps: On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 11:16 AM, Liam Wyatt <[email protected]> wrote: > - Usability improvements for the current workflow to ensure that the process > as it currently stands is clearly explained within the system (including > some user testing) My #1 request would be better options to 'mash' and 'shape' the incoming XML. Maybe you could argue that this is something that should be done *before* stuff even gets into the GWT, but IMO we are very lucky to even get GLAM professionals that know what XML is and can get it from their API. It's a bit optimistic to think that they can also write their own XML transformers like i did with GWT Cook [1] :) > - Building a report on the needs of GLAMs to be able to export their data > back out of commons (the equivalent of this Europeana-sponsored report into > requirements for usage and reuse statistics for GLAM content) Obviously this needs to fit in with the work that the WMF metrics/analytics team is currently doing because the current options (BaGLAMa / Glamarous) are just stopgaps that Magnus lovingly coded but aren't really fit for the long term. > - Building the API that will easily push content already in Europeana (i.e. > Is using the EDM - Europeana data model) to easily export to a GWT compliant > file. Sure. I guess this might be one way to convince Europeana to keep doing some development work. > - Supporting the development of the Structured Data project (somehow!) And that would be the #2 request. Hopefully we'll have a better view of what will happen with that after the Amsterdam hackathon next week. -- Hay 1: http://tools.wmflabs.org/hay/gwtcook/ _______________________________________________ Glamtools mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/glamtools
