Hi Jennifer > When do you decide that you have a 'critical mass of descriptors'?
We were thinking that this would be reached at 50% of total swatches available. We are about to add another 300 or so so that will push the timeline out further. With a bit of time we will, ourselves, go through and add a whole lot of descriptors to objects which will speed the process. > it's true, that only having a few terms to search on isn't > very functional, but is it demotivating to users if they put > in terms but then can't see the effect of their work? We did consider this but there were three barriers - - the inability to effectively block/censor spurious entries (we could have added a banned word list etc but as a pilot study it was going to be overkill) - linked to the above is the need to verify for accuracy. At the minimum a quick visual check to see that something described as red in colour is infact something approximating red. We are not checking the more subjective fields. - the immediate effect for users is only useful once we reach the critical mass otherwise I think it is potentially more demotivating. Flickr gets around this by sheer volume and the way their API has been used in nifty ways. Eg http://www.airtightinteractive.com/projects/related_tag_browser/app/ and http://www.marumushi.com/apps/flickrgraph/ > > What kind of response have you had? About 40% have descriptions and so far no bad language or spurious entries. But once we add another 300 the %age will drop again. We are looking into adding similar functions to a few other sites we have in development at the moment which will launch soon. One of them is a historical photo collection and we will be offering users the ability to enter additional information about the photographs if they know things about them that we have not yet captured such as exact location, names of subjects etc. This information along with contact info will be stored in a separate database and sent to the curator for verification. If verified, the object record can then be updated. Seb > > jt > > > At 5:04 PM +1100 11/22/05, Chan, Sebastian wrote: > >On the subject of STEVE, we are doing a similar prototype > trial here at > >the Powerhouse Museum with our Electronic Swatchbook project > >(http://www.powerhousemuseum.com/electronicswatchbook) > > > >The swatchbook has a lot of high resolution public domain (in Aust) > >fabric swatches available for download. Unfortunately, as they come > >from a series of physical fabric swatchbooks they have been > catalogued > >by the Museum as three separate books. Each book contains numerous > >swatches, all of which are unlabelled. > > > >We have, since the launch, been inviting users to describe > the swatches. > >As these descriptions are added by users of the site they go into a > >database as search terms alongside the particular swatch > record. Once > >we have a critical mass of descriptors then we will turn on > searching > >which will enable searching by colour and pattern etc. > > > >We are now looking at adding similar folksonomy tools to other > >collection-based projects. > > > >Sebastian Chan > >Manager, Web Services > >Powerhouse Museum > >street - 500 Harris St Ultimo, NSW Australia postal - PO Box K346, > >Haymarket, NSW 1238 tel - 61 2 9217 0109 fax - 61 2 9217 0689 e - > >s...@phm.gov.au w - www.powerhousemuseum.com > > > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Matt Morgan [mailto:m...@concretecomputing.com] > >> Sent: Friday, 18 November 2005 2:20 > >> To: mcn-l@mcn.edu > >> Subject: Re: subject & keyword searching in CMS and DAMS > >> > >> This looks like a great place to plug "social tagging," (an > >> approach to "folksonomy," i.e., using popular terminology > for subject > >> categorization) like what STEVE (http://steve.museum) promises. > >> Folksonomies are a way to address the reality that Museum and > >> Library professionals often use subject categorizations > that don't > >> reflect the terms most people use when searching online. > STEVE is an > >> open-source tool for enabling social tagging of museum > object images > >> to create folksonomies. > >> > >> Alongside the folksonomies, I still think it's worthwhile for > >> museums to make their internal subject terms more public. > >> Exposing the insides of the Museum in a demystifying, > educational > >> way is a great community-minded thing to do. > >> > >> Deborah Wythe wrote: > >> > >> > This doesn't make a lot of sense to me--why would > museums >not< > > >> publish subject terms in their web/public versions of the catalog? > >> > Isn't the purpose of creating subjects/keywords to make the > > >> collections more accessible --to everyone, not just inhouse users? > >> > Museum staff are likely to be looking for a specific > object and > >> have > key data--title or accession numbers--but members of the > >> public > (including picture researchers who might buy our > images!) > >> may want to > ask a system: "show me all the cats." > >> > > >> > Deborah > >> > > >> > ----Original Message Follows---- > >> > From: "JanaH" <jana.h...@cartermuseum.org> > Reply-To: > >> mcn-l@mcn.edu > To: mcn-l@mcn.edu > Subject: RE: subject > & keyword > >> searching in CMS and DAMS > Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 > 16:04:12 -0600 > > >> > Deborah, > > Museums don't always publish their subject > >> cataloging to their websites. > >> > Usually only select fields are exported from the collection > >> management > system, and for several reasons, the subject fields > >> don't make the cut. > >> > I think you'll find that the depth of information stored in > >> collection > management systems isn't really reflected in museum > >> websites. So I > guess what I'm saying is that just because you > >> don't see it on the Web > doesn't mean someone isn't > recording that > >> information. > >> > > >> > That said, I think most of us probably use a vocabulary > based on > >> the > Getty Art & Architecture Thesaurus (AAT), with local terms > >> added where > necessary. We don't use LCSH because they > are usually > >> too > conceptual/vague for our needs, but maybe someone > else will > >> weigh in > on that? > >> > > >> > > >> > Jana Hill > >> > Collection Database Coordinator > >> > Amon Carter Museum > >> > 3501 Camp Bowie Blvd. > >> > Fort Worth, Texas 76107 > >> > 817-989-5173 > >> > 817-989-5179 fax > >> > > >> > All opinions are my own and not those of my employer. > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > -----Original Message----- > >> > From: Deborah Wythe [mailto:deborahwy...@hotmail.com] > Sent: > >> Wednesday, November 16, 2005 2:12 PM > To: mcn-l@mcn.edu > > Subject: > >> subject & keyword searching in CMS and DAMS > > I'm > curious to know > >> if your museum assigns formal subject headings > and/or > keywords to > >> works of art in their collections management or > digital asset > >> management systems. A little poking around on the Web > seems to > >> indicate it's not too common -- artist name, title, medium, > > >> collection, maybe a general category, yes, but something > approaching > >> > the depth of the subject headings used in library > catalogs--maybe > >> no? > >> > > >> > If you do assign subject headings, which authorities > are used -- > >> LCSH? > >> > AAT? > >> > > >> > Thanks, > >> > Deborah > >> > > >> > Deborah Wythe > >> > Brooklyn Museum > >> > Head, Digital Collections and Services 200 Eastern Parkway > >> Brooklyn, > NY 11238 > tel: 718 501 6311 > fax: 718 501 6125 > > >> email: deborahwy...@hotmail.com > > > > > > --- > You are > >> currently subscribed to mcn_mcn-l as: > >> > jana.h...@cartermuseum.org To unsubscribe send a blank > email to > > >> leave-mcn_mcn-l-12800...@listserver.americaneagle.com > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > --- > >> > You are currently subscribed to mcn_mcn-l as: > >> deborahwy...@hotmail.com > >> > To unsubscribe send a blank email to > > >> leave-mcn_mcn-l-12800...@listserver.americaneagle.com > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > --- > >> > You are currently subscribed to mcn_mcn-l as: > >> > m...@concretecomputing.com To unsubscribe send a blank > email to > > >> leave-mcn_mcn-l-12800...@listserver.americaneagle.com > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > > >--- > >You are currently subscribed to mcn_mcn-l as: > jtr...@archimuse.com To > >unsubscribe send a blank email to > >leave-mcn_mcn-l-12800...@listserver.americaneagle.com > > -- > __________ > J. Trant jtr...@archimuse.com > Partner & Principal Consultant phone: +1 416 691 2516 > Archives & Museum Informatics fax: +1 416 352 6025 > 158 Lee Ave, Toronto > Ontario M4E 2P3 Canada http://www.archimuse.com > __________ > > > > --- > You are currently subscribed to mcn_mcn-l as: s...@phm.gov.au > To unsubscribe send a blank email to > leave-mcn_mcn-l-12800...@listserver.americaneagle.com > --- You are currently subscribed to mcn_mcn-l as: rlancefi...@mail.wesleyan.edu To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-mcn_mcn-l-12800...@listserver.americaneagle.com
