Maybe that PhD in Folklore that I dream about at night will be useful after all!

2) Software influences what types of metadata are included in collection and how the metadata are presented. For this collection, most of our class used Omeka. I enjoyed using the software because it was user friendly and provided several Dublin Core metadata elements for collection builders to use. Omeka even includes an explanation of what should be included in the fields. I still found determining what information to put in what field a challenge. Should the source field include the manufacturer of the item, where the item was purchased or who originally owned the item? I had several questions like this and eventually entered the majority of the metadata in the description field.

3) I need to take several courses in digital information management-stat.

4) One person’s trash can be that same person’s treasure. In this collection, I included an empty bottle of Westvleteren that I kept from my trip to Belgium almost three years ago. I had forgotten that I still had the bottle, but when I found it, I was excited about adding it to the collection. The personal or cultural significance of an item—its value—is subject to change over time. An object perceived as having little value could instantly become an object of significance; point of view and perception are the only obstacles that keep an object from being valued. The same goes for digital collections.

Glassware Collection at De Bierkoning, Amsterdam (Photo: Kristal)

Since studying for (and passing!) the MLIS comprehensive test, I have been thinking about the importance of metadata for digital collections and effective information retrieval. Although my knowledge of metadata structures and records is in its infancy, this course has provided me with an understanding of the principles and functions of metadata. Understanding the reasons for metadata is particularly important as I have decided to create a digital collection as my final project for this course.

My digital collection will be the historical and photographic record of my Belgian beer glassware collection. I can already sense the raised eyebrows and murmurs of disapproval. Personal tastes aside, I am most interested in creating a collection that is original, practical and of personal significance. I also wanted to build a collection that would be fun to create instead of a chore. It is my contention that a digital collection of my glassware—complete with metadata—supplements the physical collection by providing additional information about the objects. I also believe the collection’s metadata enhances its value to both myself and other glassware collectors. The collection will provide information about the objects that was not previously known. The collection will also allow users to search glasses by beer, year of attainment, country of origin and style. As I addressed in my proposal, other glassware collections I have found do not include comprehensive metadata or basic search capabilities. With my collection, I hope to create a unique set of digital content that is organized, searchable, and useful.

Stay tuned for collection updates!

For those of us interested in pursuing a PhD in LIS, we may want to consider the Cultivating Digital Librarianship Faculty (CDLF) program at the UT-Austin School of Information or Drexel University iSchool.

The American Anthropological Association recently announced that archived articles from two of its journals, American Anthropologist and Anthropology News, will be available free online in 2009. Content from 1888 to 1973 will be available via AnthroSource. So…these AAA publications have a 35 year embargo period?! I’ve heard of a 12 month embargo period for electronic journal articles-but 35 years is a generation! Discussion of the pros and cons of AAA’s open access move is available here. Although recent research is not open access, AAA has taken one small (and gold) step in the diffusion of anthropological research and knowledge.

National Archive of Scotland, Edinburgh (Photo: Kristal)

In my first post I discussed two definitions of a digital library or collection. While I find the definitions straightforward, they seem expansive and applicable to a range of online resources. A digital collection is characterized by information that is digitized and organized for effective accessibility. This immediately brings to mind several types of online resources. But many of them-like dictionaries or directories-are not usually described as digital collections. Are a digital collection and a digital library the same thing? Although I have used the terms interchangeably, a digital library can specifically refer to a library or institution web page designed exclusively to house digital documents and objects that the library or institution owns. A digital library can also be a personal web page. It looks like I need to find some research on the etymology of these terms.

Our professor, Dr. Martens, has said during lecture that a collection can be anywhere. Her definition reflects the expansive and flexible definitions of Lee and Lesk. This has broadened my conceptualization of digital libraries-and I think this type of flexibility is necessary in our complex and ever-changing digital environments.

This discussion is useful for me because I will create a digital collection for this course by the end of the semester. I have yet to select a topic for this collection. I was having difficulty choosing a topic because of the broad nature (and copyright concerns) of digital libraries. Right now I have a few ideas but nothing definitive yet. Stay tuned for updates on my topic!