Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

I would like to discuss how we interpret original order and what we ask creators about their record-creating habits and decision-making with the digital realm (e.g.  Perhaps we shouldn't assume the same priority for records that are digitally abandoned but yet kept somewhere on a hard drive).  How can we glean the creator's perspective on their own record-keeping and life with technology during the site visit and appraisal, and then transfer these elements to description?  We can't rely on automatically harvested metadata or even emulation to capture these aspects for us.  New approaches may involve asking the right questions, changing appraisal values, expanding description or even modelling relationships between technologies and documents in ways that make apparent the personal context of these records.

Training our domnor/creators

dave thompson, Wellcome Library

I would like to discuss the problems that we have in engaging donor/creators to transfer born digital material to our library.  Many of our existing donors create material digitally, but continue to prefer to print it for transfer to us. Many are organisations, we do have individual donors.  Many have been passing their material (Physical)  to us for ages.  We have spoken with our donor/creator community about the transfer of digital material, in principle most see the advantages and opportunities.  But few do it. Somehow it is too difficult.  We provide information on the digital transfer process, we explain how we'd like the process to work. We meet to discuss the means of transfer, we provide portable hard drives. We explain that we don't scatter their material willy nilly across the internet for all to see.  It's difficult to know what else to do!  I'd be interested in discussing the expereinces of others.  Is engagement with donor/creators and their digital material much more time consuming?   Are donor/crators much more 'possessive' of their digital work? Is it that they haven't managed to organise their material digital in the same way that they have their physical? Is there a perception that digital material is somehow more ephemeral and less 'important'?