Talking to my colleague who is also a DPhil “fresher” at OII, Christine Madsen, I am very happy to know how an experienced librarian trying to stimulate more activities around digital objects that means something to the audience. It seems odd to me that with all these years of development of digital libraries and museums, some projects still have not yet think more beyond digitization and information management.
It becomes even more clear when I try to have some tastes in volunteering in Museums around Oxford. The real objects are not there for the museums themselves, museum staff and volunteers work hard to hold events and activities to allow general public to access the objects in meaningful ways. Say for blind people, touching constitutes a majority of experience for them, and a different perspective for volunteers to feel the objects.
That leads to a question about how can we build activities around digital archives for educational purposes. How these activities could be incorporated into evaluation of digital archive projects, which in turn promote more sensible activities?
Since the librarians might face an identity issue when the information science or information management is taking over some of their traditional turf, from my experience talking to Taiwanese librarian association, librarians could still be very passionate about serving the general public, and they feel more assured when I argue that librarians are the guardian of fair use, public domain, etc., and thus play a indispensable role in the copyright regime. Personally I think it is a legacy to be passed on and built upon.
Intersting perceptions! Curators, Librarians and Archivists are guardians of the ‘public domain’ – and I think that there are real resonances with the Public Value debate that OfCOM have been leading for a while. For som in the sector, there is a real tension between putting collections online for everyone to discover, and the impact of Web2.0 technologies. Our sector wants to have the dialogue, but has a very keen sense of the value of ‘authenticity’ and accuracy. At the smae time, many of the real experts in their field (whether it is a bug or a bus hubcap) are outside the formal academic or professional sector, and this opens up some real challenges. When is the ‘curator’ not ‘the’ expert – and how do they manage this when challenged by an expert that isn’t one?
I was in Taiwan some time ago, and was very struck by the wealth of expert knowledge in the institutions, and amongst the professionals I met. But at the same time, I know I did not see the community museums and archives, and those who were interested in local customs and traditions.
But the answer surely is that these are all shades of grey – what we need are peer-to-peer ‘authentication’ mechanisms for people, so that they can build and share their expertise as it develops, and can demonstrate that they are trusted. Can this cope with Druids and Stonehenge? What about different perspectives on shared histories?