|
Introduction
Federated searching has emerged as an important tool providing increased
access to national heritage collections. Rather than simply a new means
to improve access, the digital environment is forcing cultural heritage
institutions to rethink their audience and records management practices.
Developing context at an item and collection level is a lengthy,
expensive, and challenging process. However, it is critical that the
metadata laid bare by these search engines be robust enough to make the
cultural heritage metadata valuable to users: researchers, academics,
lifelong learners, educators, and students. The national federated
search engines examined in this paper; PictureAustralia, Images Canada,
and American Memory all have the goal of displaying digital
representations of cultural heritage, together with their metadata, to
be accessed and used by a wide and varied audience. While this type of
national network has exciting potential, these sites are still
developing and adapting to the needs of their users. One of these needs
is contextualization. This need is highlighted in a search for cultural
heritage items related to Canadian, American, and Australian mourning
customs.
PictureAustralia, Images Canada, and American Memory
The
National Library of Australia hosts and contributes to the national
heritage network PictureAustralia. Started as a pilot project in 1998,
PictureAustralia draws contemporary and historical images of Australian
life from the collections of 44 cultural agencies including archives,
museums, galleries, and libraries. It includes digital images of art,
maps, manuscripts, artefacts, and audio and video clips (“About
PictureAustralia,” n.d.). Inspired by PictureAustralia, Images Canada
was launched by Libraries and Archives Canada in 2001. It has 15
partners contributing digital images of Canadian heritage, primarily
composed of drawings, paintings and photographs. The most comprehensive
of the three networks explored in this paper is American Memory,
which is hosted by the Library of Congress. Since its
beginnings in 1994, it has grown to include more than 100 American
heritage collections and more than nine million digital items from
institutions across the United States. Sound recordings, motion
pictures, photographs, artefacts, books, sheet music, and manuscripts
are contributed by libraries, archives, museums, and historical
societies (“About the Collections,” n.d.).
Importance of
primary sources to the user
Researchers, academics, lifelong learners, educators, and students can
benefit from increased access to primary sources
which can add another dimension to their learning and
work. Primary sources are a tool
which can be used to inform research,
and provide insight into a variety of human activities
throughout history,
all of which helps
people develop their ideas concerning these subjects.
Before the World Wide Web, this type of primary source may have been
inaccessible due to its distant location, delicate condition, value, or
because its existence was unknown (Jarrell, 1998). Many cultural
heritage items are hidden away, particularly in museums where
“information has a history of being hoarded if not outright hidden in
curatorial files” (Baca & Coburn, 2004). By digitizing their collections
in meaningful ways, cultural institutions can often eliminate these
common barriers to accessibility.
Benefits of providing online access
Furthering the mandates of individual cultural institutions
By
eliminating these barriers to access, online applications can help
fulfill the mandates of local and national cultural institutions. The
cultural institutions accessed through American Memory, Images Canada,
and PictureAustralia share similar missions to serve the public and make
their collections accessible while maintaining the integrity of these
collections. For example, the goals expressed by the Glenbow Museum in
Alberta are shared by other similar organizations across Canada, the
United States, and Australia. Glenbow Museum’s collections are available
through Library and Archives Canada’s Images Canada website. On the
“Visions & Goals” (n.d.) page of its website, Glenbow names two goals
particularly pertinent to the value of an online presence: “Refine
and build the collection and maximize accessibility, while improving
condition, utility and security” and “Strengthen Glenbow's profile
locally, nationally and internationally.”
The development of
complementary digital representations of its collections is a natural
fit with the missions of individual cultural institutions. Canada,
Australia, and the United States are among many countries using
federated searching to assist in the aims of these individual
institutions: to capture a wider audience and to make collections more
accessible and useful without compromising the preservation and security
of collections.
Authority source
Though
many institutions benefit from an online presence, the proliferation of
websites with varying degrees of authority on cultural heritage
information presents a challengeto users. Cultural heritage items must be accurately identified before
they can be properly studied. For this reason, Dempsey (2000) writes of
the importance of making collections available online despite the
challenges:
Although there
is continuity of purpose and value within cultural institutions,
these exist alongside a fundamental examination of roles and
practices. The costs of developing necessary roles and sustainable
practices will be high, as will the social and organizational costs
of change and institution building. However the costs of not doing
so will be higher, as the cultural and intellectual legacy to future
generations is entrusted to a house of cards built on a million
websites
(section 3, para. 1).
The issue of
authority cannot be underestimated. It is not enough to have an image or
sound recording alone, there needs to be authoritative metadata to
provide the opportunity for professionals, students, and the
general user to develop meaning from an accurate
contextual starting point.
The following tenuous description of mourning jewellery found on EBay
highlights Dempsey’s argument: “This auction is for a group of Victorian
celluloid Pinbacks that I would believe are actually mourning Jewelry
pieces that may have been family members who died. That's maybe a
stretch but a guess” (“Antique Celluloid,” 2006). While this is an
example of poor narrative and lack of detailed description, it
underlines the point that the image alone is not enough; there must be
an adequate amount of authoritative information regarding the image. It could be argued that
EBay is an excellent source of cultural heritage images but the lack of
authority makes it a problematic source of accurate information.
Museums, archives, and libraries provide a trusted and authoritative
source of cultural heritage information. The development of national
cultural heritage networks by such nationally and internationally known
and respected organizations as the Library of Congress, the National
Library of Australia, and Libraries and Archives Canada provides
authority to lesser known local cultural institutions whose records they
host.
More
and easier access
While many cultural institutions already present a portion of their
collections on their websites, national federated search engines have
taken access a step further by providing the user with one access point
to the collections of multiple cultural institutions. Even if
institutions provide digital images of their entire collection online,
people must know where to look and,
in the sea of websites, it is difficult to stand out and grab attention.
National networks can help solve this problem by providing one place
where people can access all of these collections at once. As Hedegaard
(2004) points out in her study of federated searching in Denmark:
People seeking
information do not care where they find it—whether it is in a book
or a leaflet in the library, from a description of an artefact in
the museum, or from an organisation’s protocol in the archives, as
long as they do find it
(Danish
Experiences section, para. 3).
Rather than
scouring the bookshelves of libraries or traveling across the country to
visit particular institutions or searching individual websites, users
can access materials online through a single network. The networks that
host the collections of cultural institutions also provide easy access
to copyright information at an item level which helps those interested
in repackaging digital representations of cultural heritage.
New
juxtapositions of cultural heritage items
Federated searching also provides some less obvious benefits that have
an interesting
effect on
the way in which users contextualize items.
Lisa
Jardine
a trustee for the Victoria & Albert Museum in London,
notes that “The traditional museum works today by presenting the
collision of ideas
(Jays, 2006,
para. 19).”
Rather than static displays, museums are constantly trying to move their
holdings around, creating new and interesting combinations of objects.
The intent is to grab attention and maintain the interest of the public.
Federated searching has the same effect on its audience. Accessing
numerous digital items from a variety of sources exposes users to
institutions, sources, and formats they may never have thought of
exploring. As a result, users can establish important connections and
points of comparison. Searches can lead to juxtapositions of previously
unconnected cultural heritage items and
to potentially new ways of thinking about human activity.
Often,
information for historical research does not come from just one source
or medium.
The understanding of a
subject
can
be enriched when
multiple sources and media are used to study it
The use of multiple sources and
media enriches the understanding of a particular subject.
Federated searching also increases the likelihood of finding
relevant resources serendipitously.
A search for items related to mourning customs in American Memory
exemplifies this opportunity to gain insight from new combinations. The
results included digitally captured photographs, artefacts, journals,
sheet music, movies, newspapers, and manuscripts from numerous heritage
institutions across the United States. Users may not expect that the
Journals of the Continental Congress would contain information
related to mourning customs, but references to these are extensive in
their pages. In one passage, the members make a pact to
discountenance and discourage every species of extravagance and
dissipation, […] and on the death of any relation or friend, none of
us, or any of our families, will go into any further mourning-dress,
than a black crape or ribbon on the arm or hat, for gentlemen, and a
black ribbon and necklace for ladies, and we will discontinue the
giving of gloves and scarves at funerals (Ford
et al.,
1774, p. 78).
The prohibition of the more extravagant forms of mourning dress was part
of a larger boycott of British goods at the time in response to the
“Intolerable Acts.” These are outlined in the timeline (“America,” n.d.)
provided for the collection. In isolation or without prior knowledge it
would be difficult to discover this passage’s significance without some
knowledge of this period in history,
so the timeline plays a vital part in providing context for the user.
One hundred years after this pact was made by the members of the
Continental Congress, vestiges of this distain for extravagant mourning
dress are still evident, though clearly the abandonment of full mourning
dress did not have long term influence on the American public. Mabel
Hubbard Bell (1876?), in a letter to her future husband Alexander Graham
Bell,
which is now located in the manuscript Division of the
Library of Congress, describes the work involved with mourning customs
following the death of a family member
as follows:
We have been
very busy all day on those black dresses. What an immense amount of
work a death in this large family makes. It is however a blessing I
suppose keeping head and hands busy, and leaving little time for
vain sorrow.[…] But I don't see when I ever can get away, there are
dresses to be made for every one of us and until they are done I
can't go much as I may want to. It's no case of luxury, but of
actual need. We have none of us proper mourning clothes.
The user could
draw on both of these examples and others available through American
Memory to discuss the evolving ideas surrounding luxury in America in
relation to mourning dress. This kind of rich cross-analysis is made
possible with
the juxtapositions of multiple sources. The single
access point provided by American Memory opens up collections to the
user
that he or she might have never thought of searching. As
Tony Boston (2003,
PictureAustralia and OAI para. 4) of PictureAustralia
suggests, “The value of services like PA is that users do not need to
know which agency holds a particular image.”
Context within the metadata
Barriers
to robustness
All
records, from least to most
detailed, are presented on the websites of American
Memory, PictureAustralia and Images Canada, but if the metadata
provided by the participating institutions are not descriptive enough
then the items
accessible through a network search may not serve a useful
purpose. The meaning of images, sound, and text is not always obvious to
the user and it cannot be assumed that people will know what an item is
and where it can fit in their understanding. This is true for both
textual and non-textual primary source materials. Accurate
interpretation can only come with complementary and adequate textual
information and failing to provide this information can lead to false
assumptions as
illustrated by the earlier example of the passage from the
Journals of the Continental Congress.
American Memory, PictureAustralia, and Images Canada all offer a
different level of support to the user to place cultural heritage items
into context,
but all provide a digital representation of the item through a moving or
static visual image or a sound recording together with the accompanying
metadata. While an image or sound bite alone may be interesting to the
user, it may not be familiar enough to make interpretation possible. At
its most basic
level, context is provided by the metadata of the
originating institutions: the libraries, museums, and archives. Metadata
supplies the complementary textual information required to identify the
item but the spectrum of content in individual records is wide and
varied. The amount of information provided in each record is dependent
on the amount known by the information professional who prepared the
metadata, the amount of time that staff member had to prepare it, and
the traditions of metadata production related to museums, libraries, and
archives.
The Open Archives Initiative Protocol for Metadata Harvesting (OAI-PMH)
is used by American Memory, PictureAustralia, and Images Canada
to collect metadata from participating institutions. In her study of the
differences between the metadata of museums, libraries, and archives,
Eulalia Roel (2005) suggests that these
institutions have developed ways of assigning metadata based on their
varied traditions. While libraries have a history of providing
consistent and uniform metadata at an item level, it is often sparse and
lacks context due to the volume of items libraries process. Archives on
the other hand spend time creating highly contextualized metadata, but
it is offered usually at the collection rather than the item level.
Museums frequently have sparse and unstructured metadata at the item and
collection levels because the mandate of museums has not traditionally
been to share metadata outside the confines of an exhibition. Roel notes
that it is “common, in fact, for curatorial staff to view metadata as
intellectual property to which they are the gatekeepers, reflecting a
professional value placed upon contextualizing materials for use” (p.
22-24).
Archives, libraries, and museums have different ways of documenting
their collections, different traditions of data collection and different
vocabularies to describe these collections.
Adbus Sattar Chaudry and
Tan Pei Jiun (2005) argue in their study of taxonomy
and access to digital cultural heritage resources that “With the lack of
common standards for knowledge organization across the cultural heritage
community, it is difficult to facilitate seamless access to resources in
cultural networks” (p. 753). In a networked environment, a user would
not be able to search the collections of multiple cultural institutions
at one time without the presence of a common vocabulary. Recognizing the
benefits of federated searching and understanding the unlikelihood of
the development of a common standard, a more realistic solution for
greater interoperability has been proposed,
namely the development of thesauri that can retrieve
metadata from a variety of networked sources that have a variety of
controlled vocabularies (p. 754). While it is evident that data from
multiple sources need to be standardized,
they also need to be made more robust in order to make the
records useful and easier to locate (p. 764). More robust metadata
benefits the user in terms of search effectiveness and the usefulness of
the record.
In order to provide the maximum access to primary sources and to be
inclusive of as many institutions as possible, American Memory, Images
Canada, and PictureAustralia all harvest the metadata of the various
cultural institutions regardless of the amount of descriptive
information that they include. This leads to a great deal of variation
in search results. A search in PictureAustralia using the term
“mourning” turned up eighty-four results. One photo from this selection,
originating from the National Library of Australia, shows aboriginals
from Papua New Guinea in 1921. The title of the photograph is “Ambasi
villages, North Coast [four women (two in
mourning and covered in
clay) with two children].” The record includes the name of the
photographer, subject, description, publisher, image number, format,
managed by, collection of series, place, and a rights statement. While
the record does provide a lot of valuable yet basic information,
it does not explain why two
of the women in mourning were covered in clay.
A mourning ring owned by the wife of James Cook, the British explorer,
is one of the most
detailed
records in the search for items related to mourning customs in
PictureAustralia. The item is entitled “Captain James Cook
mourning
ring, owned by Elizabeth Cook, ca. 1780” and shows a picture of a ring
in its original box.
The full display for this record directs the user to the
website of the State Library of NSW where two high quality views of the
ring can be seen
along with a full physical description as well as the
transcription of the inscription that is on the ring and a curatorial
note that reads:
Photograph
(b&w.) of the seal of Cook's coat of arms, that accompanied the
original donation, held at SPF/Cook, James Capt./Relics and with the
ML restoration report. Seal not located since 1985 [.] Despite
historical references to the ring being made of Cook's hair, close
examination does not indicate hair is the material used
The information
provided about the item is extensive and the high quality pictures of
the ring make it seem as if the user could reach out and touch the
object. Certainly this record would provide a valuable starting point
for further research, but
the record would be even more useful if the institution
had provided
additional information
about the use of hair in mourning items.
A new
perspective on collections management
Before the development of online catalogues, metadata was not in the
spotlight. Now, when a user searches an institution’s collection, it is
the metadata that is front and centre. As a result, institutions have
had to change the way in which they view collections management. As
Murtha Baca and
Erin Coburn (2004)
suggest, collections management systems are evolving into “collections
information systems,” which have the “larger purpose of aggregating all
relevant information about the works in a collection and preparing that
information for delivery or publication in a variety of environments and
to a variety of users, both internal and external.” Primary sources
together with their metadata are being viewed online and complementary
information needs to be made available to the online user to supply
context that would normally have been provided by an information
professional in a physical setting. This has breathed new purpose into
collections management. Cultural institutions have had to expand their
mandate into the digital environment and take another look at the way
that they deliver information to their audience through their metadata.
Sources of context beyond the
metadata
Thematic
grouping of cultural heritage items
American Memory, Images Canada, and PictureAustralia all have a method
for placing the participating institutions’ collections into meaningful
groupings. They provide a context by organizing the items into themed
categories. Images Canada calls them image trails.
PictureAustralia calls them picture trails. American Memory calls
them collections by topic. The groupings provide a framework
and starting point for those who
wish
to find specific collections or items of interest. Though
this helps to focus a search and
to place items into helpful, though somewhat arbitrary,
categories, it is not enough to get a sense of the importance of images
or
of where they fit in
to the cultural landscape of Australian, American, or
Canadian life. For example, there is an image trail of Halifax in Images
Canada containing 146 photographs, drawings, and paintings of the city.
The images are all of buildings, monuments, and landscapes in Halifax
which would make it difficult
for a person following this trail
to gain an understanding of Halifax beyond its
architecture. There is nothing descriptive beyond the item level
and nothing
that ties
these images together except the fact that they are of Halifax (“Image
Trail,” n.d.).
Introductions, outlines, and timelines
Though
additional content provided by the contributing institutions varies
between the collections that American Memory hosts, the network
encourages museums, libraries, and archives to supply introductions,
timelines, overviews, and other supplementary information related to
their collection that would be beneficial to the user. This provides
useful context at the collection level and makes accurate interpretation
of items more likely. For example, in the collection of the Alexander
Graham Bell Family Papers at the Library of Congress, users can view
annotated collection highlights, a timeline, read an article about
Alexander Graham Bell, the telephone, and the telegraph, view Bell’s
family tree, find out more about Mabel Hubbard Bell and her husband
Alexander Graham Bell, and get suggestions for further reading.
However, because this support is offered at the collection rather than
the item level, Mabel’s comments regarding her specific reference to
mourning clothing are not explained.
Images Canada and PictureAustralia do not offer this level of
contextualization on their websites, but Images Canada is attempting to
provide a framework by providing links to 10 photo essays. “Typically
written by a photo archivist or historian, each photo essay provides a
narrative on a particular theme. Photo essays are enhanced with images,
to highlight the collections of Images Canada partners” (“Photo Essays,”
n.d.). Though not on the Images Canada website, the user can link to the
institution that created them from the photo essays page.
Tools
for contextualization
Both
Images Canada and American Memory provide tools for educators to
introduce students to the primary sources available through the networks
and to help them place the collections into context for students. Images
Canada has a group of educational resources comprised of two lesson
plans and an idea bank. American Memory goes to great lengths to offer
educators support for using the collections that they host. They have
approximately 75 lesson plans that complement the collections as well as
activities for students related to the collections. While efforts
are being made to help students understand the primary materials that
can be accessed on these two networks, there are no such tools for
researchers, academics, and lifelong learners.
Challenges to greater contextualization
Diversity of users
One of the advantages of
putting collections online is
that they are made available to a wider audience, but
this also presents a major challenge. Institutions are
serving a much wider audience with various needs and expectations.
Roch Carrier, National Librarian
of Canada, commented that the goal of Images Canada
is to provide a single entry point for discovering
Canadian Images from a variety of online library, museum, and archival
sources, “This includes photographs, illustrations, caricatures;
something for everyone!” (“Images Canada,” 2001).
Providing content and context to such a diverse group of users requires
a variety of information development strategies, time, and money.
Many
students, teachers, researchers, and
members of the general public want to find out more about
cultural heritage online.
Murtha Baca and
Erin Coburn (2004) note:
Creating
access to a museum’s collections on the web opens up a whole new
level of complexity that requires careful thought, for users can no
longer be simply identified as museum staff or museum visitors, nor
can their needs be neatly categorized. Making collection information
available on the Web means that everyone with access to a computer
that is connected to the Internet is a potential user, regardless of
age, educational and cultural background or native language
(Creating Access: Two Misconceptions section, para. 1)
Technology will
continue to evolve and allow for greater access to collections, but
there must be an understanding of what the audience needs, what
information and tools the institution should strive to provide. Online
users are more demanding, expecting collections to be packaged to fit
their own requirements and interests, regardless of the complexities of
digital technology or the limitations of the institution itself
(Dempsey, 2000).
Broad
mandates of the networks
PictureAustralia
and American Memory assert that one of most import aspects of
their existence is to provide the raw materials for further exploration.
They argue that simply by making cultural heritage items accessible they
are allowing for infinite possible uses. Debbie Campbell (2002) of
PictureAustralia states that the focus is on providing “the raw
materials which can be contextualised by a school class, a higher
education unit, or an independent researcher with a specific learning
need” (p. 185). She
adds, “To borrow from Ranganathan’s laws, every item its
record, every record its item, to save the time of the searcher by
ensuring accurate records. When the records are correct, other forms of
contextualization are possible” (p. 185). Caroline Arms (2003), from the
Library of Congress Office of Strategic Initiatives, echoes this
sentiment:
From the beginning, it was envisaged that the contents in American
Memory should be not just accessible but usable. Teachers would find
materials to discuss in class; students would download pictures to
illustrate papers or incorporate into their own Web sites.
Nineteenth century sheet music could be printed and used for
personal pleasure or public performance. James Billington, the
Librarian of Congress, referred to LC's efforts as "plain vanilla".
His vision was that others could use the materials made available
through American Memory as ingredients in fancier dishes.
(Background section, para. 1)
The user is
expected to take what is needed: organize the metadata, the vanilla, in
a way that makes sense to their aims related to research, education, and
personal development.
Range
of interpretation and perspective
It could be argued that over-contextualization should be avoided because
understanding changes over time due to the relative nature of context in
historical interpretation. As well, there may be multiple perspectives
and interpretations of a single subject or event that could be
compounded over time. An 1880s photo of a woman in a black hat and scarf
(“Mrs. John Bowes,” n.d.) from the Images Canada network could be
contextualized in many different ways. The record for this photograph
already includes the subject’s name, the approximate date, the source,
the geographic coverage, and a brief description of her clothing and the
notation that she is possibly wearing mourning clothes. There are
numerous ways this metadata could be enriched. The significance of the
woman’s clothing could be explained within the context of the history of
mourning dress and customs. It could also be linked to more information
about photography during that period. This photograph could be a
springboard for numerous discussions, but which ones would the host
network or institution choose: all, some, or none?
Dempsey (2000) suggests that the availability of cultural heritage
metadata in a digital environment will provide challenges and
opportunities for cultural heritage professionals. He writes that
“fluidity” is set to replace “fixity” in the online world of museums,
archives, and libraries:
Fluid because
data flows: it can be shared, reused, analysed; can be adapted,
reconfigured, copied, and newly combined in ways which were not
possible before. A resource dissolves into multiple individually
addressable resources, or can be aggregated in multiple
combinations. Resources can carry information about themselves, can
communicate to automate processes or deliver new services, and can
yield up use or status data which can drive decisions and inform
behaviour. The creation and use of flows in a digital medium offer
unprecedented flexibility, enhancing and augmenting services.
(section
3.2, para. 2)
While increased
contextualization of cultural heritage items will create more work for
information professionals, this fluidity of data, whether it relates to
the metadata itself or additional forms of contextualization provided by
networks or individual institutions, will ultimately lead to greater
service for the user.
Conclusion
The cultural heritage networks of American Memory, Images Canada, and
PictureAustralia, have emerged in response to innovations in digital
technology and the desire to share collections more effectively. While
sparse metadata and complementary resources may make it difficult for
people to place cultural heritage items into context, they do make
people aware of collections they previously would not have discovered,
spurring them on to discover more information on their own. No matter
how robust the metadata, national cultural heritage networks represent
an important movement towards greater accessibility which will
ultimately enrich the work and study of students, educators,
professionals, academics, and the general public. While there are
challenges to providing more meaningful and useful context on an item
and collection level, the advantages of providing this added service
outweigh the disadvantages. Connections between digital images and
information-rich text make cultural heritage items more
useful to the user and allow for deeper understanding and greater
possibility of further interpretation. The new audience that the digital
environment has given to museums, archives, and libraries is not the one
that
these institutions are used to serving in a traditional
setting, but this audience needs context to make their virtual visit a
meaningful one.
|
|
About PictureAustralia. (N.d.). Retrieved
March 1, 2007, from
http://www.pictureaustralia.org/about.html#history
About the Collections. (N.d.).
Retrieved March 1, 2007, from
http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/about/about.html
Ambasi villages, North Coast [four women (two in
mourning
and covered in clay) with two children] [Picture & catalogue record].
Retrieved March 1, 2006, from
http://www.pictureaustralia.org/apps/pictureaustralia
America during the age of revolution, 1764-1765
[Timeline]. (N.d.)Retrieved December 1, 2006, from
http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/collections/continental/timeline1e.html
Antique celluloid pinback stick pin mourning real
photo [Advertisement]. Retrieved November 19, 2006, from
http://cgi.ebay.ca/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=200047047895
Arms, C. R. (2003). Available and useful: OAI at
the Library of Congress. Library Hi Tech, 21(2),129-139.
Retrieved November 29, 2006, from
http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/techdocs/libht2003.html
Baca, M. & Coburn, C. (2004, June). Beyond the gallery walls: Tools and
methods for leading end-users to collections information. Bulletin
of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 30(5), 14-19.
Retrieved September 25, 2006, from ABI/INFORM Global database. (Document
ID: 652263681).
Bell, M. H.
(1876?). Letter from Mabel Hubbard Bell to Alexander Graham Bell, 1876?
The Alexander Graham Bell Papers. Manuscript Division, Library of
Congress. Retrieved December 3, 2006, from
http://memory.loc.gov
Boston, T.
(2003). National Library of Australia initiatives using the open
archives initiative protocol for metadata harvesting [Staff paper].
Retrieved September 24, 2006, from
http://www.nla.gov.au/nla/staffpaper/2003/boston1.html
Campbell, D. (2002). Federated access to digital objects:
PictureAustralia [Electronic version]. Program, 36 (3),
182-187. Retrieved September 24, 2006, from Library, Information &
Technology Abstracts Database.
Captain James Cook
mourning
ring, owned by Elizabeth Cook, ca. 1780 [Photos & catalogue record].
Retrieved December 1, 2006, from
http://libapp.sl.nsw.gov.au/cgi-bin/spydus/ENQ/PM/FULL1?421657,I
Chaudhry, A. S. & Jiun, T. P. (2005). Enhancing access to digital
information resources on heritage: A case of development of a taxonomy
at the Integrated Museum and Archives System in Singapore [Electronic
version]. Journal of Documentation, 61(6), 751-776.
Retrieved September 24, 2006, from ABI/INFORM Global database. (Document
ID: 966173281).
Dempsey, L. (January 12, 2000). Scientific, industrial, and cultural
heritage: A shared approach: A research framework for digital libraries,
museums and archives. Ariadne, 22. Retrieved March 1, 2007,
from
http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue22/dempsey/
Ford, W.C.,
Gaillard, H., Fitzpatrick, J.C., Hill, R. R., Harris, K. E., Tilley,
S.D. (Eds.). (1904-1937) Journals of the Continental Congress: Thursday
October 20, 1774. Journals of the Continental Congress, 1774-1789,
1, 75-80. Washington, D.C. Retrieved December 3, 2006, from
http://memory.loc.gov
Image trail: Halifax. (N.d.) Retrieved December 4, 2006, from
http://www.imagescanada.ca/r1-116-e.php?trail=trail20
Hedegaard, R. (2004). The benefits of archives, libraries and museums
working together: A Danish case of shared databases [Electronic
version]. New Library World, 105(7/8), 290-296. Retrieved
September 24, 2006, from ABI/INFORM Global database.
(Document
ID: 700128981).
Images Canada
puts Canadian culture online [Press release]. (2001, June 25). Retrieved
December 4, 2006, from
http://www.imagescanada.ca/r1-200-e.html
Jarrell, M.C. (1998). Providing access to three-dimensional
collections. Reference & User Services Quarterly, 38(1), 29-32.
Retrieved December 5, 2006, from Research Library database. (Document
ID: 38857358).
Jays, D. (2006, February 4). Curating: Obscured objects of desire: Vast
swathes of museums' collections will only ever be seen by members of
staff or the occasional researcher: David Jays asks if there's a point
to all the hoarding [Electronic version]. Financial Times
[Surveys edition], 34. Retrieved December 5, 2006, from ABI/INFORM
Global database. (Document ID: 981271911).
Mrs. John Bowes [catalogue record]. (N.d.). Retrieved December 4, 2006,
from
http://www.imagescanada.ca/r1-118-e.php?uid=hhpl-MHS01377&uidc=UID&interval=24
Photo essays. (N.d.)
Retrieved December 3, 2006, from
http://www.imagescanada.ca/r1-249-e.html
Roel, E. (2005). The MOSC project: Using the OAI-PMH to bridge metadata
cultural differences across museums, archives, and libraries. Information
Technology and Libraries, 24(1), 22-24. Retrieved September 24, 2006
from ABI/INFORM Global database. (Document ID: 841255601).
Visions &
goals. (N.d.) Retrieved December 3, 2006, from
http://www.glenbow.org/about/vision.cfm
|
