On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 8:40 AM, Craig Franklin <cr...@halo-17.net> wrote:

> You mean like the Australian Newspapers Digitisation Project, which was the
> subject of a very interesting presentation at GLAM-WIKI?
> http://newspapers.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/home
> It's not strictly Wiki-like, but it shares many characteristics of our
> model
> and promises to be a great resource down the track.  I've not had a great
> look at the editing module itself, but changes/corrections seem to be
> "live"
> onto the site.  The only thing that's not clear is the licence, while the
> papers themselves are pretty much all public domain, I can't see anything
> to
> confirm with certainty that the digitized text has been released as such.

Yes, this licensing ambiguity is intentional as a result of internal
wranglings at the National Library. It's a work in progress...

What I thought that Stephen was referring more to was something akin to a
"Wikipedia loves art" but instead of taking pictures of artwork in
galleries, taking pictures of books in libraries (hence the WikiSource
reference) and objects/paraphernalia in Archive collections.

This is indeed a possibility but I think we are a couple of years away, just
yet, from being allowed into archives and libraries to do our own
digitisation. There are currently a lot of policy discussions going on in
these institutions about "digital access" and who is allowed to do what with
their stuff online. The traditional policies of "you have to ask permission
to use our content" works very well when you are thinking about physical
objects and making copies/studying them but it does not translate directly
to the online environment. Furthermore, there is the legitimate concern that
once their content "gets out" that it won't be respected or would lose its
attribution and curation/historical interpretation information. This is
quite apart from copyright concerns and has more to do with the curator's
desire to see their collection's "meaning" respected.

As such, and given the cultural sector is only just beginning to see
free-culture folks as partners (rather than as cultural pirates and vandals)
I don't think we're ready to be able to make big projects of the type
described - just yet at least. What I would advocate is that we try to
organise meetings with the local WIkimedians and the curators/staff of
specific institutions just to chat about what they hope to achieve together.
This could take the form of a lunch meeting or the form of a "backstage
pass" tour or traditional Wiki-meetup. Once the relationship has been
established - THEN - start talking about projects that could be undertaken.

That's my 2cents at least :-)
-Liam [[witty lama]]

> Cheers,
> Craig
> -----Original Message-----
> From: wikimediaau-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org
> [mailto:wikimediaau-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Stephen
> Bain
> Sent: Friday, 14 August 2009 1:04 AM
> To: Wikimedia-au
> Subject: [Wikimediaau-l] Bringing the wiki model to digitisation
> I unfortunately couldn't get to Canberra for GLAM-Wiki, though I've
> been reading the material online so far and am very much looking
> forward to the videos.
> One of the major discussion points coming out of it has been the ways
> in which these institutions offer - and should offer - digitised
> material. The costs of digitisation are a key factor driving
> institutions' desire to charge for certain usage of digitised content.
> The employees in the sector engaged in digitisation are a scarce
> resource too, which ultimately affects what material is made available
> online at all.
> My own use of archival collections for research has recently got me
> thinking: why don't we bring the wiki model to digitisation?
> The various state public archives all have facilities for users to
> purchase photocopies or scans of archival material, but some
> (certainly the archives in Victoria, NSW and Queensland) also allow
> users to take their own photos of material. Users are typically
> limited to using such photos only for personal or academic use, with
> permission for commercial use able to be requested, either from the
> archives itself or from the government agency responsible for the
> records.
> With a bit of organisation, I think it would be possible to set up a
> 'DIY digitisation' project for archival material, which would aim to
> produce digital copies of material at a quality level good enough to
> use for transcription at Wikisource. This would involve:
> 1) Identifying shortlists of material to target for digitisation.
> There is a wealth of material out there that would be of high value if
> made available generally to researchers but is currently a low
> priority for in-house digitisation.
> 2) Seeking permission for commercial reuse. With shortlists of
> material identified, this could be handled in bulk, reducing the
> burden on individual researchers.
> 3) Taking the photos and transcribing at Wikisource. As far as I am
> aware, all the various state archives are free to use (if you don't
> use the copying services) so all participants would need would be a
> camera and some spare time.
> Thoughts? Such a project would be volunteer-labour-intensive, but it
> would circumvent the current bottleneck in the digitisation process,
> namely the limited stock of professional labour engaged in
> digitisation. I also imagine there would be various groups out there,
> such as historical societies, who might be interested in contributing
> if it meant that records of interest to them get digitised.
> --
> Stephen Bain
> stephen.b...@gmail.com
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimediaau-l mailing list
> Wikimediaau-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimediaau-l mailing list
> Wikimediaau-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l

Peace, love & metadata
Wikimediaau-l mailing list

Reply via email to