Skip to main content

Navigating the "if you build it, they will come" mentality in digital libraries

Lately, I've been thinking a lot about how users come to find our digital content, and how we can improve the ways users find, navigate and interact with our content. We are in the midst of a re-design of Digital Collections for Special Collections and Archives at Kent, moving to an open source Omeka option. I'm most excited about the enhanced search and browse features, and also in using OAI-PMH to further open our collections online. I will be tracking use over the next year and looking to see how users find our collections (open Google search? From our homepage?), and then what they do once they have found what they are looking for. But this all assumes that people have found a way to search the digital collections- how can we highlight certain features that are currently hidden and buried away?

Our staff and faculty have used some social media tools in the past, but are these a lasting mechanism? Omeka has a digital exhibit function, which I hope will be quite useful as the collections grow. I think sometimes the most difficult part of creating a successful digital repository is finding ways to promote its use. One main component is of course the content itself- There has to be a compelling reason to not only digitize collections, but find a value and worth in their online consumption and use. But how does one measure this? And how does this guide future decisions?

One interesting project I had an opportunity to work with at my last job was a way that digital archives were put to an interesting test to virtually connect leaves from a medieval set of manuscripts that had been separated years before. This was an interesting way that a digital library served to provide a meaningful connection to a project: http://library2.usask.ca/ege/

This was an unusual project in that the researchers succeeded in creating a virtual "master" of a previous split and disbound set of pages. Having an open, harvestable digital library helped make the connection for these researchers, bring them from the search to the full resolution image. This is ultimately my goal for every project- make things as discoverable and easy to find as possible, but how on earth do we predict researcher need?

Another one of my first projects was to scan a small collection of rehearsal booklets from a puppet play, in German. I had an intern work on describing the images and put them online, and within weeks a German repository had somehow found the record, and in turn, made a record from their end: http://www.germanistik-im-netz.de/ginfix/105, and oddly also been picked up in an Australian repository: http://trove.nla.gov.au/result?q=Puppet%20plays (under diaries, letters and archives). I think the thing that has amazed me since loading these online in 2008 is the unexpected ways that other people will incorporate your collection, and how can you back track these collections and find how people use and link to your collections? Sometimes it's as easy as doing a few searches, while other times, we are at the mercy of how people will use and re-use digital media. It does keep things interesting- to see how content will be incorporated, re-distributed and interpreted elsewhere. It's difficult to predict these patterns, but is sure gratifying the moments when you do realize all your hard work has gone somewhere.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Privacy and digital collections

This past October, I put in a book proposal on the topic of ethical decision-making around privacy issues in digital collections. It has been accepted by Morgan and Claypool, and I am cranking to meet a May 1st deadline to get this into print by November.

It's exciting, but also nerve-wracking and perhaps a little terrifying for a few reasons. Ethics is head space that I very much enjoy- This work will include a nod to an essay from Martin Heidegger, which oddly enough I used a different Heidegger essay in my museum studies MA thesis on the ethics of art conservation. The philosophy aspect in ethics is probably the most enjoyable part for me, but it's also unbelievably murky waters. I spent many years rejecting absolutes in my early twenties, though at some point I have to put the pen to the paper and just write. (Funny sidenote- This digital girl still prefers the analog. I write primarily on my laptop and then print out draft and edit by hand. I also hate, hate, hate e-book…

Tenure track, twins and prenatal loss

Life of late has been crazy busy. Technically the tenure clock is paused this year as I toll, yet the 2 year NHRPC grant kicked off last September as I returned from maternity leave, and I continue to make a stab at research and writing in the interim. But my life has changed quite a bit (and as such, the intermittent absence of the blog).

We welcomed twins last May, who are currently inches away from walking and continue to keep me on my toes in a daily whirlwind of activity. They came into this world exactly a year and a day after our devastating full term loss in 2015. Life is strange and odd, and often I find that I am still reeling when I think about the unexplained loss of our first. It has been difficult to move on, and feel a huge part of my heart remains with that baby. There are constant reminders- friends who had successful births around the same time remind me of the huge, gaping hole in our lives when I see their little one, or walking by the tree my amazingly thoughtful…

Accessibility requirements and digital collections

So, I have found recently it is possible to teach an old dog new tricks- For the first time in too long, I tackled an area that was completely new to me and have been diving into the world of accessibility requirements for digital objects. In part, this is coming as a response to a newer policy in place at Kent State addressing electronic and information technology accessibility.

Or for other digital librarians, a colleague at another university said "OCR'd PDFs just aren't going to cut it anymore". This statement I think reflects how many of us have practiced a simple approach to textual documents in the past. Batch run OCR before ingestion, and TADA! Done, or at least we had hoped.

But, as I have come to learn, this approach is does not fair well for screen readers or adapt for those with vision impairments. At Kent State, I've been fortunate to have some great folks in the Accessibility Office to offer advice and hands-on training (Thank you, Jason Piatt! My …