Fourteen people attended an open discussion of the topic “From the trenches: what tech changes you’d like to see in the Library”.
Bobbi Fox opened the discussion with the list of teaser topics that we had included in our meeting announcement.
Steve Chapman discussed a Law School project to digitize all the case law in the US to create a free and open corpus, noting in particular the problems of redaction in both the imaging and OCR.
. There was quick consensus that we all want “massive digitization and crowdsourced OCR; a conversation ensued about what this would entail. Not only would we need access to a high volume scanner, but a variety of solutions for items that require preservation, redaction of copyrighted content, or come in odd sizes. We need ways to effectively recruit and retain volunteers to correct or supply OCR. Libraries might focus on scanning and preservation, and let third-party providers offer the great interfaces
The discussion continued and surfaced a variety of wishes. Related items have been grouped together:
Scanning and OCR:
- High volume scanner (that doesn't destroy stuff).
- "Boutique" book scanners to handle fragile, rare, and odd sized things.
- Technology to take OCRed digital text and produce metadata
- All of the support and resources to make high volume scanners useful.
End user interaction with digital content
- Examples: annotation, crowdsourcing patron structuring and page labeling of content, redaction.
- Amazon style customer images? -- Since researchers are snapping pictures of our resources, could we create a place for them to upload , share, tag and comment those images?
- More flexible display of digital images, e.g., something that lets users arrange images as on a light box.
- Interfaces should take better advantage of touch. More/better support for surface tables.
- An app to "scan" a finding aid to grab citation information for connecting to user content on their devices. This kind of app would help researchers to attach citations to photos of archival resources, for example.
Technical issues with digital content
- .” Improve delivery services.”: emphasize delivery services for e-content over metadata
- Better crosswalks between the Library Digital systems (e.g.:VIA, OASIS, TED, HOLLIS)
- URN vs URL? -- The issue raised is that, at present, since the URN resolves to a URI, it is difficult to capture the URN “on the fly”. A spirited discussion ensued as to the utility of the URN as currently implement vs. the principal behind it. Decide and PROPERLY support in perpetuity. DOI was suggested as an alternative.
- 6. DRS: easier sharing of drs? social networking. Share URN vs. URL (see above)
- The ability to import data into the drs; e.g.: importing data from csv file.
- Video in DRS
- Better automation of library/DRS related processes? More macro support to help librarians automate repetitive tasks.
Account Management Services
- Citation management in Hollis from "my account" (so researchers may send “checked out” items to Refworks, Endnote, etc.) Citation capture from licensed content. And DASH!
- When books get recalled, the recall letter should contain a link to let patrons capture/save the bibliographic information on that item for later action.
- Improve id management. "get the Library's patron database in sync with the personnel database for retirees"
- More color printers in libraries
- 3D printers
- How can we contribute to EdX?; can we leverage the Library’s work with EdX to make our stuff available beyond Harvard? Open content
- Interdisciplinarity: visual mapping of terms for the social sciences and humanities a la. Web of Science? Also see eigenfactor.org. which tracks the emergence of new disciplines.
- and, coming in via email: More time and/or people! We need time to test things out, better ways to back out of technologies we've tried that just didn't work out for us, more open communication about what we *won't* have time to do if we're working with another technology, and more people to do all of this.
The meeting ended at 4:55pm.