/
2016-02-18 Meeting notes ADWG

2016-02-18 Meeting notes ADWG

Feb 23, 2016

Date

Feb 18, 2016

Attendees

  • @Paloma Graciani Picardo

  • @Esther E Kirchner

  • @Daniela O Lozano

  • @Stephen Mielke

  • @Amy Armstrong

  • @Carla Alvarez

  • @Tim (GRA at Architecture Library)

  • @Beth Dodd

  • @Stephanie Malmros

  • @Jennifer R Hecker

Agenda

  • Welcome - Introductions

  • Housekeeping

  • February Presentation: Alexis Antracoli, Archivist, Mudd Library, Princeton University (see notes from her interview with WebTex below)

  • ACMS Update[name]

  • Round Robin Reports

 

  • Alexis's interview with TARO's WebTex subcommittee:

    • Please describe all the different tools and technologies that make up your current descriptive environment? Why were these particular tools chosen? What other options did the Princeton team evaluate?

    • What was your process of evaluation?

    • Please describe the adoption/migration to your current archival collection management system? Did you encounter any challenges in the adoption/ migration process? Can you discuss your data clean-up workflows?

    • How the site works/technologies that contribute to collection management and public access:

      • they are currently in the process of evaluating the current site to still if it still serves their needs

      • they are already looking at the next iteration of the finding aid site (follow up: what are they currently considering)

      • the site you see is a custom built site by their systems department; they evaluated existing publishing platforms and dlxs but decided no

      • they do not have an integrated collections management and front end system; the site currently just publishes the collection description

      • the backend of the site involves several technologies and steps because they do alot of extra things/enhancement to their ead to provide the functionality people se on the site (sorting by date and title or linking digitized material to the finding aid site)

      • mudd currently uses AT and they manage their accessions data there; they do not use it as a database of record for anything else that they do (no locations, no finding aids); the really only use it for accessions

      • they do share this stack of technologies with other libraries on campus but they may have a different process or workflow manuscripts division)

      • MUDD Process:

        • Everything was already in EAD

        • when a collection comes in, they try and get as much descriptive info up front with date to make the process faster

        • accession record created in AT (an authoring tool for collection level information - but may change the EAD later, not storing master EAD)

        • Export EAD from at; if a collection came with description like a box list, spreadsheet) they have an xslt that they use to take the transcript/list data to transform the list into a EAD inventory

        • Once the finding aid is created, they run it through a “normalizer script” that (does a bunch of things to clean up the data):

          • normalizes dates

          • strips label attributes and <p> elements

          • adds unique component ids (if you go to the URL for a given level of description within a finding aid, you’ll see the various components have unique ids)

            • this serves to create an id that never changes even if physical items are moved in a box - the unique id is also the basis for relating digital objects to specific components - this component id becomes p

        • They validate the record - they have a looser and a stricter schema

        • Once errors are cleaned up, they commit the master EAD to SVN version control system and SVN is used as a the database for the finding aid site - additions are updated and added nightly; this is the master record

        • They also have a test site to upload EAD and preview it before they publish the EAD

        • For the test site, they upload to an eXist database  - so it’s in there somewhere

        • Systems Team - John Ellis, Sean Stroup (decision and versions of technologies, implementation) - they would be able to tell us exactly how these different tools are talking to one another

      • they do have a princeton archival collection working group to discuss workflow standardization but

        • mudd uses less ACms functions because they get much more info when it comes in the door; they have donations

        • manuscripts division uses AT/ACMS differently because they purchase collections and create more from scratch

        • collection description is done independently among repositories on campus

      • Looking at the second round improvement:

        • ADWG subcommittees (because this group is big and each can carve out their tasks)

          • UX

          • Digital Objects/Born digital - they are a hydra partner now so this subcommittee will be considering that in the context of collection description

          • Authority control/SNAC/EAC-CPF

          • Data modeling - moving away from EAD to their own data model; looking at the article on the EU Sendari (sp?) Project, LOD

          • UI

          • ArchivesSpace task force

Discussion items

Item

Who

Notes

Item

Who

Notes

Discussion of Princeton's Finding aid system

Amy, Beth, Esther, Paloma

  • Liked the integration of digital content and ability to sort results

  • How are comments intended to be used? Moderated? No parameters present. More work for staff?

Discussion of Briscoe Center public service moving to the Benson

Stephanie Malmros, Carla, Amy, Esther, Beth

  • Through next December

  • Items paged every half hour

  • Appointment based

  • Smaller space: fewer reference materials

  • Beth: other projects on hold? Stephanie: exhibits will be conducted at LBJ, must functions can continue

  • Beth: biggest improvement? Stephanie: Reading room up to date, dedicated classroom space, flexible spaces, exhibit space

  • Front desk staff have been getting some complaints- researchers don't care about exhibit space, feel it is unnecessary

  • More finding aids are now available online for researchers

Skype call with Alexis Antracoli, Archivist, Mudd Library, Princeton University

Alexis, Paloma

  • Introductory info:

    • Works at Mudd manuscript library, which is part of rare books and special collectins

    • Took job in July 2015

    • Oversees technical services, digitization and electronic records

  • Paloma question: Background of project? Alexis answer:

    • Mudd converted to EAD in around 2006

    • New site was launched in 2012

    • Old site had less functionality, displayed EAD

    • New site: better functionality, allows access in a variety of ways, can look at finding aids whole or use search to find stuff at each level of description.

    • Can easily attach digital items to finding aids

    • Can do on-demand digitization and then attached items to finding aid

    • Can sort on date, title, box #'s, etc.

    • Simple and advanced search

    • Topics page

    • Use eac-cpf records (data is pulled from finding aids automatically using a script written at Firestone)

    • Involved in SNAC and want to do more with that, but no specific plans yet.

  • Paloma question: Is SNAC data pushed or Pulled? Alexis answer:

    • Not sure. Are biog/hist notes even worthwhile?

    • Ex. Woodrow Wilson. He was president of Princeton, but most biog/hist notes about him won't focus on this.

  • Paloma question: How was finding aid project coordinated? Alexis answer:

    • Two main repositories, Firestone and Mudd, with separate technical services units. Two teams collaborated with systems. Total of 4-5 people plus systems worked on project.

    • Created a proposal and then met 2/month to develop the site

    • A lot of data cleanup was involved

    • EAD goes through normalization and cleanup

    • Processing:

      • Staff use Archivist Toolkit for processing- creates a skeleton description at collection and series level

      • Try to get inventories up front from donors

      • Students enter data into excel and use stylesheet to transform excel into EAD

      • Don't enter a lot of data directly into Archivists Toolkit, which cuts down on processing time

      • Once created, finding aid is normalized (esp. dates), then validated against in-house schemas

        • Two schemas: looser one for older descriptions, stricter one for new descriptions

      • Then finding aid is uploaded and commited to site

    • Each component of the finding aid has its own url- normalizer adds this as a data attribute to each component

  • Paloma question: Best practices of authorities and taxonomies? Alexis answer:

    • Authorities applied in archivists toolkit (subjects and names module)

    • Currently working on cleaning up names using open refine

    • Data from Archivists Toolkit will be moving into Archives Space and want to cleanup before migration.

    • Processing archivists can apply subjects freely, use LCSH, AAT, genre/form - which is esp. useful for born-digital items

    • University has files on alumni, fac/staff etc. which is very siloed and not searchable through the finding aid system

      • trying to get indexes into EAD so they're findable on the finding aid site

      • Some data my not be fitted to EAD, and would work better as EAC-CPF ex. birth/death dates, associated departments etc.

      • University archives thinking about adopting EAC-CPF for this, but project is a few years out

  • Paloma question: How does commenting function? Policies? Alexis answer:

    • Idea was to get people to provide information about collections

    • wound up getting a lot of reference questions which are passed onto public service. Also a lot of spam.

    • Not used as originally conceived.

    • No guidance is provided on how to use system.

    • Maybe a newer iteration of site can add more guidance on how to use comments.

    • Once in awhile someone points out a mistake, but it's rare.

  • Paloma question: Future improvements to site? Alexis answer:

    • Not sure what would replace current system.

    • Possible improvements:

      • Hard to tell if a finding aid includes digital content

      • Easy to overlook pdf version on page

      • Like California Digital Library system- makes it easy to search for digital content

      • Left tree view is a little clunky- needs better usability

    • Looking at some UX improvements, incl. user testing and google analytics- need to figure out priorities

    • There is also a committee on born digital, authorities and data modeling: considering moving away from EAD to a different data model altogether.

    • There is also an ArchivesSpace subcommittee

  • Paloma question: Are you members of ArchivesSpace? Alexis answer:

    • Yes, haven't migrated yet, will start with accessions and born digital content.

Post skype discussion

Paloma, Jennifer, Beth

  • Surprised to hear they are considering moving away from EAD

  • Benefit of ArchivesSpace is ability to export EAD/EAD3

  • Some interest in continuing discussion of data cleanup projects/methods/tools - next meeting?

  • Current project to do data cleanup on TARO - 40+ repositories, various tools and processes involved.

  • Beth: Architecture library also working on data cleanup: figuring out what metadata they want, then will begin actual cleanup work.

    • Looking at access and restriction areas- can we all use similar or standard terminology?

    • Privacy and confidentiality data is siloed

  • Jennifer: Possible to compile US-level public safety/gun laws document, list any laws that affect public service?

  • Steve: HRC is looking at museum collection management systems (Past perfect etc.) but ArchivesSpace would make sense for archives

  • Beth: Architecture is interested in ArchivesSpace

  • Jennifer: Fine arts finding aids are in pdf format, not in EAD. Would like to get them into TARO

  • Discussion of Excel to EAD tools

Action items