Cassie's Reflection: Looking at the Digital Library in the Mirror

               I have learned many things from this digital library experience, but it is tough to evaluate whether my expertise increased significantly or not. I feel that many of the conclusions our group came to in regards to metadata, guidelines, the technical aspects of the project and navigating Omeka were guesses that eventually made some sort of sense via trial and error (and research, of course). This might always be the case, however, if there is not digital expertise in-house, and of course each new experience builds upon the last. Knowing that this learning curve exists for beginners, and that there may not always be an expert available to show one the ropes, taught me that if I should pursue a digital library project in the future, seeking outside feedback from experts, consultants or colleagues in the beginning phases would be helpful to give the project shape and direction. Exploration is the necessary first step of any project, and with so much information available on the subject, as well as the collective knowledge of digital librarians everywhere, it would be helpful to seek out guidance from those trusted sources.

               I learned that a good team is essential in completing any successful project because there are too many steps for one person to do, and each of the steps is dependent on the other. Because of this inevitable overlap and cause and effect relationship, the members of the team must have a strong skill set and specialized knowledge, or at least a willingness to learn, and of course tenacity to see the project through all the inevitable technological difficulties. Fortunately, our team was just such a team, and we were able to rely upon one another throughout the entire process. I have been continually impressed with my teammates’ knowledge and abilities, and my own knowledge has expanded because of this interaction.

               I would have liked to have had more hands on experience, but the responsibilities were fairly and necessarily divided. Therefore some of us “did” and some of us planned. However, I do feel that my knowledge of the “how-to’s” from start to finish have increased significantly from what it was before. As we asked questions, found answers, and then questioned the answers, there was a lot of learning taking place, and valuable resources were found for future reference. As I continue to expand my knowledge in this arena, I would like to have actual experience working in a digital library in order to understand how things are run when there are resources available and protocol is set. Understanding workflows inside a library setting would be greatly helpful.

               All in all, I definitely learned that planning is essential, and that you have to be ready for things to go wrong. When they do, however, there are plenty of resources available to help you figure things out. Troubleshooting, teamwork, and a commitment to excellence are all key components in the creation of any successful digital library.

Joon's Final Reflections

As this semester draws to a close, I would like to reflect on this final Digital Libraries project. I think my group members will agree that this project has been quite valuable. As a group, we were able to draw from a diverse pool of skill-sets and talents, delegating appropriate tasks and reconvening after each milestone. Perhaps most impressive was our ability to trouble-shoot. Thankfully, as graduate students we have an extensive network of information professionals with whom we can consult when our own resources have been exhausted. I hope my group members will also celebrate our success.

A last detail we decided to polish up was our tags. We all decided we would add a few tags to five items. I believe types of illnesses, region of TN and a number of other concepts were encompassed by these index terms.  We considered using Medical Subject Headings (MeSH terms) but decided since the people using this library were not necessarily medical professionals, that laymen’s terms would be more recognizable to the social justice community. The terms we decided on maximized the library’s usefulness and accessibility. Another finishing touch included picking an image to be showcased in the final site’s banner. I kicked around a few ideas with Clayton but in the end we decided to have that image rotate, in order to keep the site a little more dynamic.

If I had to critique the final site, I might alter the thumbnails of the portraits to better frame some of the subjects. Overall I think we had a clean simple interface though. I also thought our final presentation to the class was quite successful, with each of us creating our own individual slide, describing our delegated part and then touring classmates through the finished product. I think we each spoke for similar lengths of time and answered questions pretty effectively.

After listening to all the presentations for all the projects, I feel that I got a sense of just how diverse digital libraries can be. They are really a great way to reach all kinds of different people. From Appalachian musical instruments to graphic novels to social justice, digital librarians offer a trove of information to anyone who can cross the digital divide. I hope that librarians like Melanie and Bridger, who specialize in metadata practices, are valued by the institutions that house their work.

Metadata Guidelines

The following list contains the name, description, and example of use for the Dublin Core elements to be included in the metadata for The Faces of TennCare image collection. The full set of guidelines, "Using Dublin Core - The Elements", are available on the Dublin Core Metadata Initiative (DCMI) web site.

Title. The name given to the resource. Typically, a title will be a name by which the resource is formally known.

The Title is comprised of the name(s) of the individual(s) photographed. Do not use abbreviations or symbols and do not underline or place the title in quotations.
Example:  Mike and Nancy Frankich

Description.  An account of the content of the resource. Description may include but is not limited to: an abstract, table of contents, reference to a graphical representation of content or free-text account of the content.

Since the Description field is a potentially rich source of indexable terms, care should be taken to provide this element when possible. Best practice recommendation for this element is to use full sentences, as description is often used to present information to users to assist in their selection of appropriate resources from a set of search results.

The Library of Congress provides several guides to describing and cataloging photographs on its web site at http://www.loc.gov/rr/print/cataloging.html.

Type.  The nature or genre of the content of the resource.

The Faces of TennCare is comprised of images. Therefore, "Image" (capitalized without quotations) should be used in this field.

Creator.  An entity primarily responsible for making the content of the resource. Typically, the name of the Creator should be used to indicate the entity.

Personal names should be listed surname first, followed by given name.
Example:  Powell, Joon

Rights.  Information about rights held in and over the resource. Typically, a rights element will contain a rights management statement for the resource, or reference a service providing such information. If the rights element is absent, no assumptions can be made about the status of the rights with respect to the resource.

Example:  ©2006 The Faces of TennCare. Images may not be copied, printed or otherwise disseminated without express written permission the rights holder or its agents.

RightsHolder.  A person or organization owning or managing rights over the resource.

The RightsHolder for all images is Joon Powell (format as written).

Date.Created (maps to Date).  A date associated with an event in the life cycle of the resource. Typically, Date will be associated with the creation or availability of the resource.

We will use the qualifier, Date.Created, to make this more specific.
If the full date is unknown, month and year (YYYY-MM) or just year (YYYY) may be used. Many other schemes are possible, but if used, they may not be easily interpreted by users or software.
Example: 2006-02-16

Format.  The physical or digital manifestation of the resource. Typically, Format may include the media-type or dimensions of the resource. Examples of dimensions include size and duration. Format may be used to determine the software, hardware or other equipment needed to display or operate the resource.

Example:  TIFF

TechniqueCapture (maps to Format).  See above.

In this case, we are using this element to provide information on the type of equipment used to capture the digital image.
Example:  Digital photograph taken with a Canon EOS DIGITAL REBEL.

Location (maps to Coverage).  The extent or scope of the content of the resource. Coverage will typically include spatial location (a place name or geographic co-ordinates), temporal period (a period label, date, or date range) or jurisdiction (such as a named administrative entity).

Recommended best practice is to select a value from a controlled vocabulary (for example, the Thesaurus of Geographic Names [Getty Thesaurus of Geographic Names, http://www. getty.edu/research/tools/vocabulary/tgn/]).
Example:  Cookeville (Tennessee)

Identifier.  An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context. Recommended best practice is to identify the resource by means of a string or number conforming to a formal identification system.

The Identifier will be the image file name. Each image will have a unique identifier consisting of the lowercase letters 'ftc' (acronym for Faces of TennCare) followed by a 3-digit number.
Example:  ftc_001

Uploading the Content

Our group convened at the Nashville Public Library (our de facto "office") to finalize the csv metadata document and upload the content to our Omeka site. Many thanks to Bridger from UT for his guidance and advice on the metadata and csv process!

The process did not work as seamlessly as we had hoped. On our first try, the csv document didn't import properly due to the commas in our text. On the second attempt, the images didn't link to the metadata (we had items with images and no metadata). On our third attempt, we succeeded in importing the csv file and linking the metadata to the image files, however it created all new items (thus, doubling the number of items--so we had a few items with metadata but no images). Clayton is going to resolve this by just deleting the photos and uploading them again to the new items we created. 

Our next task was to address how we wanted to assign subject headings or tags to our images using a controlled vocabulary (such as Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) or the Library of Congress' Thesaurus for Graphic Materials (LCTGM). We ultimately decided to assign tags to the images. We will discuss this matter further in a subsequent meeting.

Finally, we turned our attention to the design theme of our site. Unfortunately, there are few choices available when using the free version of Omeka at omeka.net. So, while we aren't overly thrilled with the aesthetic design of our site, we at least enjoyed the satisfaction of seeing the fruits of our labor online for all to see.

 

Collection Guidelines

Faces of TennCare Collection Guidelines

Purpose

The Faces of TennCare online digital library will consist of digital objects representing photographs created by team member Joon Powell, who holds the copyrights to these images. The photographs represent portraits of Tennesseans whose health insurance was cut by the state government in 2005 and 2006. This is a prototype of a potentially larger project in that we are using approximately twenty-five percent of the photos that were taken; this site could potentially expand to include more photos.

The Faces of TennCare digital library will serve as a communications tool for other healthcare advocacy organizations. Volunteers and staff at an array of historically progressive groups such as the Tennessee Justice Center, Tennessee Health Care Campaign, Tennessee Disability Coalition and others will be able to mine for stories in this digital library, ultimately facilitating increased access and discovery for the allied coalition members.

The Faces of TennCare digital library team includes members Clayton Altom, Jami Awalt, Tara Bergfeld, Cassie Ellis and Joon Powell, each of which are assigned various tasks in the creation and governance of the library (Clayton: create prototype; Jami: metadata; Tara: technology research; Cassie: collection guidelines; Joon: collection content). These tasks overlap and the team works as a whole to implement the project.

These guidelines are meant to help shape the final output of this digital library and will be made available to the team via our team blog for use during implementation and in case of future additions.

Images

Images are born digital. The original TIFF file is considered to be the master file. Derivative images with a resolution of 100 ppi, with a bit depth of 24 bit color, will be made and housed in the online library, powered by Omeka. Omeka does not require the use of a thumbnail image.

File-Naming Conventions

Each digital object will be assigned a unique identifier, following a consistent naming convention. Images are currently named according to the subject’s first and last name: firstname lastname.tif.  Images will be renamed as ftc_001.tif, ftc_002.tif, etc., where ftc = faces of tenncare. The naming convention is designed to be less than 8 characters, to represent the collection while providing a unique identifier for each image, to replace spaces with an underscore (_) and to avoid capitalization. Personal identifiers will not be used in the naming convention to avoid possible surname repetition and to eliminate the need to differentiate between multiple names when the digital object represents more than one person.

Collection Development

Access to the Faces of TennCare digital library will be made available through www.omeka.net, and will be accessible via a permanent link once the digital objects are loaded.

Clayton Altom will be responsible for developing the collection by completing the following tasks: choosing a theme, creating a collection to encompass the digital objects, setting accessibility rights, and uploading images. Tara Bergfeld will be responsible for creating the .csv metadata file and importing the metadata into the collection. The team will review the collection to make sure proper linking of metadata to files has occurred, and to approve the final product.

Metadata

Metadata conventions to be followed are as outlined by team member Jami Awalt in a separate document, which can be accessed via the team blog. Metadata will follow the simple Dublin Core format.

Omeka allows the use of tags to enhance searchability. The digital objects will be tagged with keywords in lieu of adding formal subject headings.

Guiding Principles

Collection guidelines and principles are adapted from those as outlined by CARLI (2007, 3) in its “Digital Collections: Collection Development Policy,” and contain the following for consideration:

• The extent to which the digital version can represent the original; if the full content is not to be included, the usefulness of the digital object must be carefully considered.

• Whether the materials will display well digitally using current, readily available technologies

• File size and network capacity to deliver the digital content to the user with reasonable speed

• Resources available to support collection organization and interface design to support and maintain the digital collection

• Resources available to catalog and provide metadata relating to document identification, provenance, full item description, and technical capture information for each item in the collection

Getting closer to the end...

Our group met via Collaborate this evening to talk about our progress and assign tasks for the final stages of the project. Tara researched our options for batch-loading the image files and corresponding metadata. Via appshare, we previewed the site in edit mode. Tara and Jami are going to work together to link the chosen metadata fields with the corresponding csv file. Once this is complete, the entire group will preview and edit five files--paying particular attention to language and format (this will divide the work evenly between each of us as well as provide each of us with a hands-on experience with creating and editing metadata).

We assigned the tasks as follows:

• Cassie will post her final technical guidelines to the blog
• Tara will create a shared doc on Google so we may all participate in the creation and editing of the metadata
• Jami will post the metadata fields and instructions for using Thesaurus for Graphic Materials to describe the images to the blog
• Joon will provide additional descriptions and info as needed for the images
• Clayton will finalize the site design
• All group members will create powerpoint slides detailing their responsibilites/work for the class presentation
• All group members will post individual reflections about the project to the blog

The group will reconvene on Wednesday, April 11th, at 8:00 pm on Collaborate to discuss progress and rehearse the class presentation