Annotated Bibliography

Introduction

The purpose of this annotated bibliography is to compile a list of essential resources that I will use as a new digital project manager. As a model for such a position, I used a recent job posting for a digital project manager from a public library. The description focused particularly on the design, creation, and maintenance of digital collections, and mentioned knowledge of particular metadata standards and content management systems specifically. Therefore, in preparing this document, I focused on these requirements; however, given a different position, resources on other metadata standards and content management systems could be substituted. In addition to drawing inspiration from this description, I used what I have learned about digital libraries, digitization, and project management over the course of my education to inform my selections.


MLA format was chosen for the citations since many are electronic resources, and MLA is particularly good at representing these materials. The citations are organized into various categories, and, in general, from least to most specific within each subsection.


When selecting resources, some consideration was given to the preferences of the author. When a choice between electronic or analog format existed, partiality was usually given to the electronic format due to their ease of accessibility and the ability to search the full text of most of these resources. The author also prefers a style of writing that is both clear and succinct, and undoubtedly her bias towards such writing made a difference in which resources are presented here.


Digital Project Management



Project Management Hut. 2009. The PM Hut Team. 23 Apr. 2009 http://www.pmhut.com/


The Project Management Hut (PM Hut) describes itself as being considered “the largest database of categorized Project Management articles on planet Earth” (About Us page). While that claim might not be supported by actual research, there certainly is a lot of information on this site. All of the articles and resources are attributed to specific project managers, whose biographies are available on the site.


This resource would be useful for me in two ways. First, there are a number of introductory handbooks and guides to project management that would be beneficial for me to read at the start of my career. Secondly, this site is useful in the long run as a resource to go to when I have questions about project management. The breadth of coverage is huge, but the categories list on the homepage and the ability to search the full text of the articles means that I can use PM Hut as a quick reference for project management related topics.


A note on the next three resources: In preparing this bibliography, articles by Frank Cervone turned up again and again. Although it might be considered best to get opinions on a topic from as wide a variety of sources as possible, Cervone’s clear and concise style makes for articles that I know I will read multiple times to remind myself of the most important issues concerning project management. Therefore, I included three of them here. I will also be on the lookout for more of his writing in the future.


Cervone, H. Frank. "Standard methodology in digital library project management." OCLCSystems & Services 23.1 (2007): 30-34. Emerald Fulltext.


This article goes through the basic processes of project management as defined by the Project Management Body of Knowledge, an international standard for project management. It is a good primer for someone first learning about project management, and it will serve as a quick reminder of the steps I should be aware of moving in to my first project. It also outlines and defines the nine “knowledge areas” of project management.


Cervone, H. Frank. "Developing the business case for a digital library project." OCLC Systems & Services: International Digital Library Perspectives 24.1 (2008): 18-21. Emerald Fulltext.


The article summarizes the “hows” and “whys” of creating a business cases for digital library projects. It goes into detail about the planning phase of the Systems Development Lifecycle (SDL) including SWOT analysis and establishing feasibility and desirability. Also included is a list of criteria that a business case should address and the details that should be included.


As a project manager, getting institutional buy-in is essential for success, and developing a business case seems to be a great way to do that. This article is a broad overview of that process that highlights the most important elements of a business case for digital library projects.


Cervone, Frank. " How not to run a digital library project." OCLC Systems & Services: International Digital Library Perspectivees 20.4 (2004): 162-66. Emerald Fulltext.


This article is a list of the most common pitfalls for digital library project managers. It is short, but chock full of warnings written in a very readable style. As a new project manager, it will be less desirable to learn from my own mistakes than from those made by others; this article gives me the chance to see some potential problems before they occur. It can also be read as a priority list of the most important tasks for a project manager.


Technology Resources for Storage and Access


The CMS Matrix. Plain Black Corporation. http://cmsmatrix.org/


This site provides the means to compare over 1000 open source and proprietary content management systems on a wide range of features. Furthermore, the site includes discussion boards where users can ask questions and share their experiences with specific content management systems. There is also a great list of links to other CMS evaluation sites. One criticism of the site is that content management systems have to be added by their vendors, which means that vendors can choose not to participate. However, even if a content management system that I want to evaluate is not listed, I can use the list of features on the site to compare the systems and evaluate the unlisted content management system myself.


Han, Yan. "Digital Content Management: The Search for a Content Management System."Library Hi Tech 22.4 (2004): 355-65. Emerald Fulltext.


This article is an excellent resource to read when in the process of choosing a content management system. It goes through shaping the organization’s definition of a CMS and determining the organization’s needs in terms of a CMS’s functional abilities (capabilities) and non-functional abilities (constraints). The authors then examine many open source and commercial content management systems through a two round process, describing three content management systems in depth. Included in the appendix is an excellent table that outlines all of the points the library used in evaluating the various systems. The table is a great starting point for determining any digital project’s needs.


Drupalib. http://drupalib.interoperating.info/


This site is a place where libraries that use Drupal for their content management system can go to share resources and ideas. The open source nature of Drupal means that this site also allows for the possibility of collaboration. There is also a list of all of the library websites that use Drupal, so if I were a Digital Project Manager using Drupal, in addition to connecting with other users, I can see real examples of what other libraries are doing with Drupal. Of course Drupal will likely not be the CMS chosen for every project I am a part of. This site is included here as an example of the type of CMS-specific site I would want to use as a digital project manager.


McGath, Gary. File Formats Blog. 2009. http://www.fileformats.blogspot.com/


This blog by Gary McGrath, a digital library software engineer from Harvard University Library’s Office of Information Systems, provides a great deal of information about digitization in libraries with a particular focus on choosing file formats. What I especially like about the blog is that McGrath seems to spend a lot of time on preservation. Since this digital preservation is a new and challenging field, following this expert will help me keep on top of what I will need to know to make sure that I’m not only helping to create the best possible digital assets today, but that there are processes in place to do the best possible job of preservation to make sure that they are just as available in the future.


BCR. BCR 's CDP Digital Imaging Best Practices Version 2.0. 2008.http://www.bcr.org/cdp/best/digital-imaging-bp.pdf


This online document is a complete resource for digitizing images, from planning through preservation and storage, but its strength is in the technical details of how and what is needed to begin digitization. It explains the necessary hardware and software considerations as well as file formats and types. Embedded within the document are scores of other resources that will come in handy during an image digitization project, and since it was just published last year, I can be confident that the advice is current. One thing that I particularly like about this resource is the concise writing style that is only as technical as it needs to be. In my own work I anticipate working with images more often than audio or video assets. If I became a project manager for a project that involves audio and/or video, I would consult a similar set of best practices for that media type.


Selecting Materials to Digitize


Chapman, S, D Hazen, J Horrell, and J Merrill-Oldham. "Selection for Digitizing: A Decision- Making Matrix." CLR Reports. 1997. Council on Library and Information Resources and Harvard University Library. http://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/hazen/matrix.html


This matrix is a fairly complex series of yes or no questions that a person in charge of determining what materials from a collection can and should be digitized can use to aid them in the decision making process. The matrix itself is simple to use, even if answering the questions it poses is not. It is a nice high-level view of what needs to be taken into consideration concerning material selection before a digitization project gets too far along in the process. As a digital project manager, I would likely use this matrix at the beginning of the process of planning a project. If a number of different ideas were on the table, taking each one through this matrix would be a good way of possibly narrowing down project options.


"Inside CDL: Collection Development Framework." California Digital Library. 2006. The Regents of the University of California. http://www.cdlib.org/inside/collect/framework.html


This collection development policy is included in this bibliography for two reasons. First, it serves as a placeholder on the list for the collection development policy for the institution that I will work for in the future. Most libraries have such a policy, and in selecting materials to digitize, it will be an important document to consult. The second reason is because the CDL’s collection development framework is particularly good. The framework consists of 18 principles that are meant to guide digital collection development in particular. Linked at the bottom of the document are a number of other good resources (including the CDL’s standard license agreement and checklist, and requirements lists that they use for publishers and vendors) that would serve as good models for a library developing similar documents. If the organization I will work for needs to update their collection development policy to include digital materials, or if they need to create any of the documents linked to on the page, these are excellent models to follow.


Cost Estimates and Funding


"RLG Worksheet for Estimating Digital Reformatting Costs." 1997. Research Libraries Group and Cornell University's Department of Preservation and Conservation. http://worldcat.org/arcviewer/1/OCC/2007/08/08/0000070511/viewer/file2733.pdf


This is a comprehensive worksheet for determining the cost of a digitization initiative. The worksheet is a little old, but most of the outdated sections are easily adjusted. It is important to note that this worksheet only covers the initial costs of digitization, and therefore does not include costs for things like planning, assessment or preservation. If I were actually estimating costs using this worksheet, I would transfer the information to an Excel file that calculates the numbers for me so that it would be easy to make small adjustments in numbers and see how the overall cost was affected. Having the information in this format would also make it easy to integrate it with the additional estimates for the costs the worksheet does not include.


"Grant and Award Opportunities." 2008. Institute of Museum and Library Services. http://www.imls.gov/pdf/2009_Grant_Opportunities.pdf

AND

Grants.gov. 2009. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. http://www.grants.gov/


These are the types of resources I would look to if there were a financial gap between the project goals and the budget resources for a digitization project I was working on. Many of the digitization projects I have studied in this class and others were funded by IMLS grants. More than just a list of grants, this guide also gives grant writing tips and directions on how to apply for grants on Grants.gov, which is a much larger compilation of grants. IMLS has the advantage of being already narrowed to the types of grants that I would most likely be applying to, thereby saving me time finding relevant opportunities. Grants.gov, although bigger and therefore more likely to require a greater investment of time for research, provides the opportunity to find grant money from outside the typical sources for libraries.


Copyright


"Copyright Law of the United States of America and Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code." U.S. Copyright Office- Copyright Law: Chapter 3. United States Government. http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap3.html


The law is the most authoritative source of information on copyright. If one is consulting any other document, no matter how well written and objective that document might be, it is still only an interpretation of the law. Although the language is not easy to understand for the layperson, there is still no substitute for having a copy on hand to consult when documenting decisions that concern copyright. As a digital project manager, there is a chance that I would need to consult copyright law when making decisions about either the library’s copyright policy or when deciding whether or not a material in our physical collection can be digitized.


Hirtle, Peter B. "Copyright Term and the Public Domain in the United States 1 January 2009." 5 Jan. 2009. Cornell Copyright Information Center.http://www.copyright.cornell.edu/public_domain/


It is likely that if I am a member of a digitization team for a public library, a large number of the materials we will digitize could be in the public domain. There are many guides to help non-lawyers determine if materials are in the public domain, but I personally find that Peter Hirtle’s guide strikes the right balance between being thorough and easy to understand. One of the ways that Hirtle strikes this balance is through his use of footnotes to develop further the explanations in the chart. Hyperlinks in the footnotes provide even more resources. As a digital project manager, this is where I would start when making decisions about copyright and determining public domain.


Copyright Renewal Database. 2006. Stanford University Libraries & Academic Information Resources. http://collections.stanford.edu/copyrightrenewals/bin/page?forward=home


Determining public domain for resources published between 1923 and 1963 is particularly tricky since the continuation of copyright protection depends on whether or not the copyright for a particular item was renewed. This searchable database is an excellent resource for determining whether or not copyright was renewed for a book. Important to note is that the database only covers books; nonetheless, the resource is still valuable. The homepage for the site also contains a link to the Project Gutenberg site where there are digitized copies of all renewal records if one needed to see whether a copyright on a non-book was renewed (although these records are not searchable). If I am in a position of determining whether or not an item published between 1923 and 1963 is in the public domain, this resource will be very helpful.


FACE (Friends of Active Copyright Education). Copyright Society of the U.S.A.http://www.csusa.org/face/home.htm


The FACE website, from an authoritative non-profit organization that has been in existence for more than 50 years, is a large collection of copyright information that is divided into six separate categories: moving images, internet, words, music, still images, and international. When a user chooses one of these categories, they are presented with an overview of the copyright law as it pertains to that type of resource and lists of FAQ’s, myths, and additional resources. The information on the site comes from a very conservative interpretation of copyright law, but as a project manager this seems like a safe angle from which to proceed in making decisions that have copyright implications. The language on the site is very simple and succinct. A few parts of the site are still under development, and it would be greatly improved if for each FAQ or myth a link was provided to the actual law, but I still believe that this is a valuable site to watch.


Metadata


Gill, Tony, Anne Gilliland, Maureen Whalen, and Mary S. Woodley. "Introduction to Metadata Online Edition, Version 3.0." www.getty.edu. 2008. Getty Research Institute. http://www.getty.edu/research/conducting_research/standards/intrometadata/


As a digital project manager, this would be my “go to” guide for metadata. It covers everything from what metadata is to why it is essential to best practices with a particular focus on digital resources. I’ve found the fact that it is an online guide particularly helpful since I can search full text to find exactly what I’m looking for (although chapters must be searched individually, which has proven to be frustrating a few times). On top of all of the useful and current information, the bibliography is a great additional resource where the citations are broken into three separate categories. Many of the job descriptions I have read for digital project managers place a heavy emphasis on metadata, so it is reasonable to expect that a guide like this will be essential to my job.


Dublin Core Metadata Initiative (DCMI). 2009. DCMI. http://dublincore.org/


EAD: Encoded Archival Description Version 2002 Official Site. 2008. Library of Congress. http://www.loc.gov/ead/


MARC Standards. 2008. Library of Congress. http://www.loc.gov/marc/


The job description that I am using as a model for this assignment mentions metadata standards twice within the short job description, and the above three standards by name. Each of these official sites would be my starting place for information on that standard. Of the three sites, the most up-to-date and comprehensive is the site for Dublin Core. Easily located on the site are DCMI mailing lists, wikis, and online communities. In addition to reading the more static information on the site, following these resources and possibly becoming an active member would really help me stay up to date on the latest news, applications, and technologies relating to the metadata standard. While some of the features available on the Dublin Core site are also available on the MARC and EAD sites, it is likely that I would have to do additional research on MARC and EAD to get all of the information that I can find on Dublin Core’s site.


Harold, Elliotte R. XML 1.1 Bible. 3rd ed. Indianapolis, IN: Wiley Publishing, Inc, 2004.


A solid knowledge of XML will be very important when working with the metadata for digital resources. The above book is useful for both the absolute XML beginner as well as someone who knows and understands the basics of XML but wants to learn more about supplemental XML technologies. The amount of information in this tome is exceptional, but Harold’s style of writing and use of entertaining examples makes it very readable. This book served me very well when I was first learning XML, and I have consulted it many times since. I know that as I put my knowledge into practices as a digital project manager, I will turn to it whenever I need a refresher.


Powell, Andy, and Pete Johnston. "Guidelines for implementing DC in XML." Dublin Core Metadata Initiative. 2003. DCMI. http://dublincore.org/documents/dc-xml-guidelines/


As a student I’ve taken classes both in metadata and XML. As a digital project manager, it is unlikely (although possible!) that I will be doing a lot of the code writing for the digital library, but I am sure that an understanding of how a metadata standard and its XML schema relate will be important. Access to this authoritative list of recommendations and examples allows me to understand the standards a digitization project should be following. In addition to the article itself, the list of linked resources in the references section provides more explanations of the type that can be found in the above Harold text. Therefore, if I need more or different information on XML, I can use these sources. If the digitization project I am working on uses a metadata standard other than Dublin Core, then a resource similar to this for that standard would be useful.


Preservation


Seadle, Michael. "The digital library in 100 years: damage control." Library Hi Tech 26.1(2008): 5-10. Emerald Fulltext.


This article provides a short explanation of migration, emulation, and enduring standards and analyses planning for preservation including a discussion of funding, potential risks to watch out for, and what to do if an archiving system is failing. As a digital project manager, it will be my responsibility to help plan for the future of the assets I will help create, and this article is a nice overview of the issues I need to think about now and a warning about possible problems I could encounter in the future.


"Interactive Assessment: Selection of Digital Materials for Long-term Retention." Digital Preservation Coalition. 2006. DPC. http://www.dpconline.org/docs/handbook/DecTree.pdf


Similar to the CMS Matrix, the “Decision Tree” as it is referred to on the DPC website, provides a long series of “yes/no” questions that aid one in deciding whether a digital resource can and should be preserved. It involves four steps: selection, rights & responsibilities, technical/costs, and documentation & metadata/costs. This document will be instrumental in preservation planning. As a digital project manager, I know that decisions about preservation are best made from the planning stages. Tools like this matrix really clarify the issues that need to be considered when making those decisions.


Caplan, Priscilla. "Understanding PREMIS." 2009. Library of Congress Network Development and MARC Standards Office. http://www.loc.gov/standards/premis/understanding-premis.pdf


The idea of preservation metadata is an essential consideration when thinking about preserving digital assets long term, and PREMIS is one of the more popular models. This work is an introduction to PREMIS, and provides me with the information I would need as a digital project manager to consider implementing preservation metadata. At the very least, after reading this guide I have a strong understanding of the types of information that I need to track if I want to ensure long-term access to digital assets.


Lawrence, Gregory W., William R. Kehoe, Oya Y. Rieger, and Anne R. Kenney. "Appendix A: Risk-Assessment Workbook." 2000. Council on Library and Information Resources.http://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/pub93/AppendixA.pdf


If, as a digital project manager, the organization I am working for were considering migration as a preservation strategy, a workbook like this would be very helpful in determining if and when migration should be implemented as well as planning the migration process. The workbook claims that it is trying to substitute for a migration and risk assessment “team of experts” that the authors know most institutions would not have the means to hire. The calculations it takes the user through are quite scientific, but the language makes it easy to understand. It would be my hope that if a different preservation strategy were chosen by an institution I might work for, that a guide like this would also exist for that strategy.


Digital Project Evaluation


Covey, Denise Troll. "Usage and Usability Assessment: Library Practices and Concerns." 2002. DLF & CLIR. http://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/pub105/contents.html


The job description that I am using as a model for this project mentions that the digital project manager will play a role in designing the digital library’s space. As a part of making sure that this space works for the library’s users, usability assessments should be planned and conducted. This guide provides answers to the “who, what, when, why, and how” questions for various user studies including surveys, focus groups, and user protocols among others. The information on transaction log analysis is particularly useful for digital libraries. Decisions about performing usability studies should be made during the planning stages, and this guide will help me integrate them into the initial project proposal.


Tenopir, Carol. "Use and Users of Electronic Library Resources: An Overview and Analysis of Recent Research Studies." 2003. CLIR. http://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/pub120/pub120.pdf


This lengthy article provides an overview of 200 recent usability research studies performed in libraries. Tenopir outlines very clear, authoritative criteria for what types of studies were included. It is a nice companion article to the above article by Covey since it follows up on most of the same methods by describing what libraries discovered by conducting usability studies. As stated earlier in this bibliography, one of the best ways to find success is to learn from the earlier experiences of others. As a digital project manager, this article will allow me to anticipate problems that might occur during a usability study for a particular digital project.


Additional General Resources


"A Framework of Guidence for Building Good Digital Collections, 3rd Edition." 2007. NISO and IMLS. http://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/pub120/pub120.pdf


This is an authoritative guide to best practices when building digital collections. It is broken down into sections on the principles of good collections, objects, metadata, and initiatives. One thing that I like in particular is that it emphasizes the process of building a collection, “The key to a successful project is not to strictly and unquestioningly follow any particular path, but to plan strategically and make wise choices from an array of tools and processes to support the unique goals and needs of each collection” (p. 3). The best parts of this guide are the lists of resources that support each of the principles. As stated previously, examining and learning from how other institutions have completed projects provides valuable lessons in how to proceed when making decisions about a project currently in development.


Sitts, Maxine, ed. Handbook for Digital Projects: A Management Tool for Preservation and Access. Andover, MA: Northeast Document Conservation Center, 2000. http://www.nedcc.org/resources/digitalhandbook/dman.pdf


This is an excellent overall resource that I have come across in more than one class, but the primary reason I chose to include it here is because of the chapter by Janet Gertz on vendor relations. Gertz first takes readers through the process of deciding whether to digitize in-house or use a vendor. Presuming that the decision to use a vendor is made, Gertz then goes on to explain how to choose a vendor, including the processes of creating Requests for Information and Requests for Proposals, evaluating vendor responses, writing a contract, and maintaining quality control. Unless an institution that I work for already has an in-house digitization lab, I will be a part of the process when making decisions about vendors, and the information in this chapter will be especially helpful.


Hughes, Lorna M. Digitizing Collections: Strategic Issues for the Information Manager. London: Facet Publishing, 2004.


Chapters 4-7 of this comprehensive book on digitizing collections will provide important information for me as a new project manager, particularly concerning working within a larger institution and collaborating with other institutions. This resource also contains good information on project planning and costs, especially budgeting and funding.


OCLC. Online Computer Library Center, Inc. http://www.oclc.org/us/en/default.htm


This organization and its resources are both massive and far-reaching. It would be difficult to work as a digital project manager for a library and not find myself on the OCLC website. If I work with ContentDM, I will be working with OCLC. If I want my collections to be available in WorldCat, I will be working with OCLC. As an intern, I am already working with people from OCLC. They might be a source of funding, they might provide a library I work for with software, or I might just stay up to date by reading one of their journals. I have visited this site every semester that I have been a student, and this likely will not change as I transition into a professional career.


Digital Library Federation. 2009. DLF. http://www.diglib.org/dlfhomepage.htm


The DLF site is a rich source for information, particularly on their publications page. Although the site says that new publications will have to be purchased on Amazon, the links to their latest publications are still active. The reports here are authoritative, and almost any one of them might be relevant to me as a digital project manager. When conducting research on digitization in the future, there is a good chance that I will find pertinent information on this site.


Hurst-Wahl, Jill. Digitization 101. 2009. http://hurstassociates.blogspot.com/


Digital project management is a constantly changing field, and following the blogs of professionals in the field is one way that I will stay current. Features that I like about this blog include the frequency that it is updated, the relatively wide range of topics concerning digitization that are covered, the label navigation on the left-hand side, and the author’s own list of digitization resources. In addition to keeping this blog in my feed reader, I have already used it to search for advice on particular topics, and I feel confident that it will continue to be useful as a digital project manager.


Jordan, Mark. Digitizationblog. http://digitizationblog.interoperating.info/


Following this blog is a good way to keep up with new information that is being published elsewhere on digitization. There is not as much commentary or context as on the previous blog; these are more like quick headlines with links to the source of the information. This format is useful because it does not require a lot of time; I can read the summary, and then click on the link if I think the information is important. The blog is also searchable, which means that when doing research on any aspect of digitization I can perform a quick check to see if Jordan has written any information on the topic I am looking for.

Annotated Bibliography

There has been much discussion and planning in my organization of late concerning the creation of a digital office. While there has been much discussion about who will do the work and what will be digitized, we are still in the planning phase. While we have had some disagreement as far as what and how much should be ultimately digitized, the important thing is that we have started to look at what we need to do to in order to become a fully digital office. As we have begun to move forward with the changes in both the administration and in the implementation of new protocols as deemed by the U.S. Department of Higher Education, the need to go forward with our digitization project has grown. Currently there are no established protocols for formatting documents, such as software version, or file types, what is needed is to provide a structure for digitizing documents, with well-defined protocols for storage and retrieval. Our Digital Library (DL) will be the main interaction process for all documents and will be accessible through a secure network connection, web accessible, and eventually be able to connect to the existing data structures.

Creating a digital library will require an enormous, but much needed, culture change, and will be met with understandable trepidation (and in some cases resistance). The current culture of document and process management is quality control on output and a belief that paper documents are official and the only truly accurate documents (including records, lists and reports). We enter data, then keep separate list to check data entry, but only as an output measure. Therefore, our main goal should be to improve the quality of current accreditation processes by bettering our historical records and record management services that support the advancement and enrichment of our accreditation activities.

For the purposes of this initial portion of the project we will be focusing on the institutional documents and records and not the Human Resources or Accounting office records. Those departments will be added to the digital library at a later date. Consisting of paper, electronic files, audio recordings of lectures, this collection is located in the main offices of the organization and use is reserved for employees and independent scholars with permission from the member institutions. There are no specific laws or rules that pertains to regional accreditors and their institutional files, though it has been decided that we will retain 20 years (two cycles) in the active files. However many of the member institutions have been accredited for much longer and several have been with the organization since its inception.

There are no established protocols for formatting documents, such as software version, or file types. What is needed is to provide a structure for digitizing documents, with well-defined protocols for storage and retrieval. The DL will be the main interaction process for all documents, will be accessible through a secure network connection, web accessible, and eventually be able to connect to existing data structures, and will allow the 40+ staff (and eventually 1000+ peer reviewers) to access data on or about accreditation, peer review, as well as other activities and institutional information that will allow for the creation of a more cohesive organization of information for providing accreditation services.

While a document is a written account, it is no longer necessarily one that can only be viewed on paper. Paper and a document can now be separated. Once created, documents have lifecycles, and a path, along with a method for storage and retrieval. In a paper-based world, we think of this as file folders and file cabinets. In a digital system we have a method for document transfer, storage and retrieval. The document content is stored electronically, and thus will require the organization to focus on aspects of document storage and retrieval such as file name protocols as this will affects efficient retrieval.

Articles:

Andolsen, Alan A. “Will Your Records Be There When You Need Them?” The Information Mangement Journal (May/June 2006): 56-61
• Short article that focuses on the management and extended retention of digital records. Very useful as a quick reference for not only digital but the non-digital (magnetic tape etc) environmental requirements as well. This will come in very handy as we have a plethora of microfiche that will need to be properly cared for as well as giving us guidelines when looking for a digital repository.

Arms, Caroline. "Some Observations on Metadata and Digital Libraries." Discussion paper presented at the Library of Congress Bicentennial Conference on Bibliographic Control for the New Millennium, November 15-17, 2000. Online: http://lcweb.loc.gov/catdir/bibcontrol/arms_paper.html
• Discusses the differences between and on ground and a digital library and the importance of metadata and the expectations of users. This article has been very helpful in understanding what is needed and expected to make the digital library more searchable.

Arms, Caroline R., and William Y. Arms. “Mixed Content and Mixed Metadata: Information Discovery in a Messy World.” Chapter 14 in Metadata in Practice. Diane Hillmann and Elaine Westbrooks, eds. Chicago: ALA, 2004.
• Indeed, “content comes in a bewildering variety of formats,” (p. 223) and this chapter describes cross-domain metadata and the use of metadata for information discovery and retrieval. Emphasizes the need for coherent metadata and its relationship to content.


Bantin, Philip C. “Strategies for Managing Electronic Records: A New Archival
Paradigm? An Affirmation of Our Archival Traditions?” Archival Issues 23 (No.1, 1998):
17-34.
• Offers different models for managing electronic records, including the “life cycle model” and the “records continuum model.” The Article also goes in to the appraisal of electronic records and the importance of doing such including the theory that we can no longer appraise by content alone. Will be a good piece to use in the development of our Information policy.

Bishoff, Liz, and William A. Garrison. "Metadata, Cataloging, Digitization and Retrieval: Who's Doing What to Whom: The Colorado Digitization Project Experience." Discussion paper presented at the Library of Congress Bicentennial Conference on Bibliographic Control for the New Millennium, November 15-17, 2000. Online: http://lcweb.loc.gov/catdir/bibcontrol/bishoff_paper.html
• This paper, while about the collaborations between museums and libraries, highlights the issues and differences that arise when trying to unite metadata across departments or organizations. While we are just working on our own digitization project there has been talk of possibly working with the other organizations like us to make a unified DL.

Brodie, Nancy. “Authenticity, Preservation and access in digital collections.” The New Review of Academic Librarianship. (6:2000), p. 225 – 236.
• This article examines how various organizations and communities see digital information and it’s authenticity. Interesting specifically since we are such an odd organization in some ways and we have yet to determine what level of authentication to use (i.e. how secure does it need to be?). Also the discussion on the “fluidity of electronic information” (p.229) is needed in light of discussions on what is a final copy.

Chopey, Michael A. “Planning and Implementing a Metadata-Driven Digital Repository.” Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 40:3/4 (2005) 255-287
• Chopey’s piece takes the reader step by step through the creation and implementation of usable metadata. This is one article I have passed out several times knowing we need to develop our metadata further using the xpertise from staff across all areas of the office.

Emery, Priscilla. “Beyond Features & Functions: Evaluating RM Software Alternatives in the Real-World Environment” The Information Management Journal (Jan/Feb 2007): 28-34.
• On vendor selecting and questions that the organization must ask of itself before signing a contract with an ERM vendor or digitization company. Also discusses what to consider when looking at electronic records management software. A helpful piece that will frame our discussions in the weeks ahead as we interview companies for electronic storage and retrieval.


Hedstrom, Margaret.” Descriptive Practices for Electronic Records: Deciding what is
essential and imagining what is possible.” American Archival Studies, 381 – 394.
• Highlights the challenges we face when discussing description of the electronic records and how it may hinder search and retrieval. Something we will need to be considering especially since there is a variant of opinions on what and how much should be included in the metadata.

Hedstrom, Margaret. “How Do Archivists Make Electronic Archives Useable and
Accessible?” Archives and Manuscripts 26 (May 1998) 6 – 23.
• Concerning user needs and expectations in the creation, management, and preservation of electronic records and how this can effect workflow. Again, something terribly important that we as an organization will need to look at. For the time being we have been more concerned with the actuall digitization and less so about the retrieval.

Hedstrom, Margaret. “Digital Preservation: Problems and Prospects.” http://www.dl.slis.tsukuba.ac.jp/DLjournal/No_20/1-hedstrom/1-hedstrom.html
• Discusses the potential and eventual problems with digital preservation. Also acknowledges that the demand and expectations placed on digital assets may make for unrealistic goals for librarians, RM, or archivists. An interesting piece in light of the organization wanting to do away with all paper records. May be creating a much larger culture shift than we intended.

Henry, Linda. “Schellenberg in Cyberspace.” American Archivist 61, Fall, 1998: 309-
327.
• Calls for a change in archival theory and looks for better ways to work with electronic records/collections. Not specifically about digitization, but lays a good background for understanding why an archivist can be a big asset to the DL project.

Hicks, Emily A., Jody Perkins, and Margaret Beecher Maurer. “Application Profile Development for Consortial Digital Libraries: An OhioLINK Case Study.” Library Resources and Technical Services 51:2 (2007): 33-43.
• Describes the pupose of a digital repository and why this is different from a digital library (some thing that is not understood currently in the organization). This case study also describes how a complex data structure can be developed and utilized.

Schamber, L. (1996) “What is a Document? Rethinking the Concept in Uneasy Times.” Journal of the American Society for information Science 47 (9): 669-671
• Though an older article, it helps to bring understanding that a document is no longer just that piece of paper on your desk, but something that consists of “dynamic, flexible, nonlinear content, represented as a set of linked information items, stored in one or more physical media or networked sites; created and used by one or more individuals in the facilitation of some process or project.” This is more an educational piece to explain to the users what is going on with the DL and why we are doing it.

Smith, Abby. “Why Digitize?” Council on Library and Information Resources. (February 1999)
• Addresses the unexpected downside of digitization (budgetary, and workload) that may be over looked when beginning a new digitization project. She notes that she is not discussing this topic to “bring alarm” but to “encourage every professional responsible . . . to assess this new technology.” These “cons” will need to be addressed in a better light before continuing on with our project as they have yet to be noticed.

Wisser, Katherine M. Druscilla R. Simpson and Peter E. Hymas. NC ECHO Preservation Metadata for Digital Objects (PMDO). 2007 Edition. Online: www.ncecho.org/documents/pmdoaccesstool.pdf
• Metadata that will assist in the preservation of your digital assets. This article addresses the need to make changes to the digital records as technology changes and how to do so with out jeopardizing preservation. An important thing to consider before spending the money on the project is to be sure that we understand where we will have to spend money again in the next 5 – 10 years.

Books

Gill, Tony, Anne Gilliland, et.al. Introduction to Metadata. Los Angeles, CA: Getty Publications, 2008
• Much as it did in 1998 and 2000, this edition gives a general introduction to metadata and discusses the issues related to metadata in the creation and maintenance of digital resources. Like the article by Wisser et.al. this will be important information to consider as we plan the budget for the DL for the next 5 – 10 years.

Gilliland-Swetland, Anne. Enduring Paradigm, New Opportunities: The Value of the
Archival Perspective in the Digital Environment. Washington, DC: Council on Library
and Information Resources, 2000. http://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/pub89/contents.html
• Seeks to address and help understand the rapid development in information technology and the impact on the life cycle of digital resources. Brings an archival perspective to the changing roles in digital preservation and the digital environment. For an organization that is in some ways built on institutional knowledge, Gilliland’s idea of documenting relationships is a way of mapping out workflow, something that desperately needs to be done if we are to understand what documents and records we will be placing in the DL.

Hodge, Gail. Systems of Knowledge Organization for Digital Libraries: Beyond Traditional Authority Files. Washington, DC: The Digital Library Federation. 2000. Online: http://www.diglib.org/pubs/dlf090/dlf090.pdf
• An overview of the digital library field as it stood in 2000 as well as practical advice and information for those of us just starting out. Includes information on implementation of policy as well as enhancement of current practices. Section 4, “Planning and implementing Knowledge Organization systems in Digital Libraries,” is an interesting and useful look at analyzing user needs. Before embarking further on our project this in particular will need to be addressed.

Stephens, David O. Records Management: Making the Transition from Paper to Electronic. ARMA International, 2007
• Stephens offers a look at the building an effective electronic RIM program as well as highlights some of the pitfalls that a new RM may run in to (budget and copyright) as well as other overall management challenges. Budget as a while has yet to be discussed at the organization, these pit falls need to be highlighted and addressed.

Owens, Genevieve. Electronic Resources: Implications for Collection Management. Binghamton: Haworth Press, 1996
• Explores the social, archival, budgetary, and work implications of moving to an electronic environment for your collections. Also assists in learning to evaluate and select materials for the electronic collection. Since we have no information policy in place as of this time, it would behoove us to begin drafting policies on selection such as discussed by Owens.

Lesk, M. (2005) Understanding digital libraries. 2nd edition. Morgan Kaufman: San Francisco, CA. 2005
• Looks at how a digital library should be planned as well as an examination of what is needed technologically, economically and legally. This is a must have for the organization as it will aid in the foundation steps we are currently taking and will assist in the future guidance.

Stielow, F. Building digital archive, descriptions and displays. New York:Neal-Sschuman. 2003
• A general guide for managing a digital archive, this text speaks more to those in the organization that wish this to be a more open and web based application. This text will assist in bringing together the individuals who see this as a stagnant electronic file and those who see this project as a living breathing archive that will support the over all mission of the organization.

Websites, Blogs, et.al.

www.arma.org
• An international organization and professional association devoted to the development and maintenance of paper and electronic records management, ARMA provides updates on legislative and regulatory matters, standards and best practices, technology trends, as well as continuing education. The online

http://www.nyu.edu/its/humanities/ninchguide
• NINCH (National Initiative for a Networked Cultural Heritage) Guide to Good Practice in the Digital Representation and Management of Cultural Heritage Materials established in 2002, this guide promotes the thinking through the digitization project as a while, not just one section (collection) or another (description). List good practices and principles that can be utilized by more than just a cultural heritage organization.

http://www.dlib.org/
• D-Lib Magazine: the focus on the development in digital libraries is very up to date and quite informative. Addressing not only technology, but economics and legal issues as well D-Lib is a wonderful resource that will make the finding of some of our member institutions available to us and possibly open up avenues of collaborations as of yet that are unexplored.

http://www.aiim.org/
• AIIM: a non-profit organization that works to assist users and members with managing documents, electronic records, and content. Offering webinars, podcasts, and continuing education. Also are the publishers of Infonomics Magazine. Very helpful with the continuing education and the webinars along with the downloadable information has been very helpful.

Annotated Bibliography

Introduction

While digitization projects are complex and involved, there are countless resources available to help guide staff members through every step. Below is an annotated bibliography of 26 sources I believe would be helpful in mounting and carrying out a digitization project. As a possible future project manager or team member, I believe some of these would give me and my co-workers an introduction to digitizing issues and concerns, while others would provide more of a thorough focus. Having that variety would help to address different levels of knowledge on the project team, and help the team members explain the project to others, in order to gain approval, and perhaps funds.
This annotated bibliography includes resources which focus on the digitization of a variety of collection types – mainly museum, archive and library collections. However, it was my intention to prepare this list more for a museum collection digitization project than any other. Of course, museum is a very broad term that can be associated with many sorts of collections. A synonymous term that could be used is cultural heritage organization (CHO). However, even works in an archive or library collection can still be characterized as CHO collections.
It will be noticed right away that this annotated bibliography is not formatted in the normal manner. Because digitizing is extensive, the list is broken up into categories, some of which are roughly in the order in which they would be used in the process of digitization. However, at the end, there is a larger collection of miscellaneous resources that fall into different areas of the digitizing process. The categories, in order, are: Broad Coverage; Selection; Copyright; Metadata; Digital Imaging/Digitization; Outsourcing; Preservation; Costs; and Miscellaneous. Within each category, the resources are listed in traditional alphabetical order.
As of 4/26/09, all of the resource links were functional.

Broad Coverage

PADI Thesaurus. (n.d). National Library of Australia Preserving Access to Digital Information (PADI). Retrieved April 18, 2009, from http://www.nla.gov.au/padi/topics/thesaurus.html

This particular page within the Preserving Access to Digital Information (PADI) website gives the user access to the main hub of information that PADI provides. It offers links to topics on almost every matter concerning a digitization project. Types of resources include articles; books; events; projects and case studies; policies, strategies and guidelines; bibliographies; organizations and websites; tools; journals and newsletters; online tutorials; glossaries; evaluations; surveys; and discussion lists. A discussion/definition of the topic is also provided before the list of resources. Many of the topics on individual pages could be presented in this annotated bibliography from categories such as Costs, Preservation, Metadata, and Copyright. However, the PADI website offers much more information, both on broad topics, as well as specific ones. The Discussion List is a good resource for finding discussions, blogs, or listserves to join, in order to keep in contact directly with other digitization project personnel.
PADI also has its own listserv, called padiforum-l, which discusses preservation issues. It is a moderated listserv that provides its users with a place to exchange news and ideas about digital preservation issues. The link can be found on the “About PADI” page.
Maintaining a website with up-to-date relevant information on digitization is a part of PADI’s mission. Therefore, the site is an ongoing resource for new developments on all current digitization topics and issues, and will include new concerns and developments in the future. Most likely, no one article, book or other resource, will be sufficient for answering all questions about any one topic of the digitization process. Therefore, it is ideal to have a resource like this that can provide easy access to many resources at once. Furthermore, individual resources mentioned on the page come from various countries, which can open up research into new developments and concerns from all around the world.

Sitts, M. K. (Ed.). (2000). Handbook for Digital Projects: A Management Tool for Preservation and Access. Andover, MA: Northeast Document Conservation Center. Retrieved April 7, 2009, from http://www.nedcc.org/resources/digitalhandbook/dman.pdf

This is an excellent source for tackling a digitization project. It provides a solid overview with good detail and aids (including questionnaires and checklists), as well as lists of other resources to help lead an organization through the difficult and long process of digitizing a collection. With additional r (like those mentioned in this annotated bibliography) that provide further detail on some of the topics discussed in the Handbook, it provides a well-rounded basis for completing a project successfully. Material covered in the Handbook includes discussions on project management, the selection process, copyright issues, technical concerns, vendor relations, and case studies.
Several authors have contributed to this book, all of whom are, or have been, involved in the digitization world, either in professional or educational contexts. All types of institutions that would most likely digitize a collection could use this manual. However, at times, the authors pay particular attention to museum collections, which only makes it more useful and appropriate for my research.

Selection

Decision Tree for Selection of Digital Materials for Long-Term Retention. (2006). Digital Preservation Coalition. Retrieved April 9, 2009, from http://www.dpconline.org/graphics/handbook/dec-tree.html

Within the context of policies regarding object selection for long-term preservation, the Decision Tree provides a series of questions to consider before deciding whether to digitize a work and then preserve it for the long haul. The tree starts by asking questions about the selection process, like whether the object relates to the collection policy. The next section of the tree refers to copyright issues, and then moves on to technical and cost issues like file formats, storage space, and whether funds are available. Finally, the tree ends with documentation, metadata, and costs. This section asks whether there is enough documentation/metadata for the object, whether it can be acquired and whether the staff is available to research it if it isn’t.
Because digitizing a collection is so complicated, having tools such as this tree, Peter Hirtle’s copyright chart (mentioned below), and other resources mentioned in this annotated bibliography, can simplify certain aspects of the process and add consistency and order to the project. The tree may also bring some issues and concerns to light that may not have been considered before, which will improve the project on a whole and prevent problems in the future. The tree is also generic, in that it will work for any collection, and it has been updated from its original version. There are two versions presented online – an interactive html version and a PDF version. Both versions provide help if questions are not clear, and provide advice for what to do at particular junctures.

Hazen, D., Horrell, J., & Merrill-Oldham, J. (1998, August). Selecting Research Collections for Digitization. Washington D.C.: Council on Library and Information Resources. Retrieved February 5, 2009, from http://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/hazen/pub74.html
In this article, concerns are discussed and assessed which are similar to those specifically referred in Section 4 of the Handbook for Digital Projects: A Management Tool for Preservation and Access (discussed above), as well as elsewhere. The Handbook and this article both present useful information for selecting material, and both have their positives and negatives. They discuss many of the same concerns that must be considered when selecting material to be digitized. The Handbook lays it out it in a more user-friendly manner, with tables and forms to help complete the selection process, but this paper offers additional information not mentioned in the Handbook. It presents questions to be considered for each type of material in the collection and then provides examples to help explain how different types of materials can be affected by various concerns. These questions go into more detail and dig a bit deeper than those mentioned in the Handbook. Because the selection process is so crucial to the successful outcome of a project and because this article “anticipates all the major stages of project implementation,” it is a great source for gaining more in-depth knowledge of this important step.
The three authors all work in the Harvard library system in different capacities and in different specialties, so it is apparent that they can bring a well-rounded view and knowledge to the topics discussed in this article.

Copyright

Brewer, M. (2007). Digital Copyright Slider. American Library Association Office for Information Technology Policy. Retrieved April 2, 2009, from http://librarycopyright.net/digitalslider/

The Slider provides direction for determining what the copyright status of a work is, how long its copyright term lasts, and whether permission is needed for digitization. A red arrow to the right of the page can be moved with the computer mouse and pointed at any one of twelve copyright situations. Ten refer to the date of first publication, and the remaining two refer to whether or not the author is deceased and the work was ever published. As the red arrow is moved, the information pertaining to the topic is provided in two small windows to the left. One window answers the question, “Permission needed?” and the other explains the copyright status/term. When the window includes an asterisk, more information is available. The Slider’s results are not always concrete or entirely reliable, but the additional information provided when an asterisk appears can address some unresolved issues, and some links are provided for additional information or clarification, in order to at least point a user in the right direction.
The Slider applies only to copyright issues within the U.S. If a work was published outside of the U.S., the Slider would be invalid due to the laws varying from one country to another. As it says in the Disclaimer, the page is not meant to act in place of legal counsel. Each copyright issue is unique, so this tool can give direction, but it is not meant to be one’s single authoritative source for determining copyright status.

Copyright. (2009). American Library Association. Retrieved February 19, 2009, from
http://www.ala.org/ala/issuesadvocacy/copyright/index.cfm

This website offers comprehensive information about copyright issues, as well as the legislation behind copyright. As of the date viewed, not all pages of the site had been completed or reorganized, including a page regarding Copyright Education, which may be helpful once it is finished. Useful pages include discussions of Digital Rights Management (DRM), Fair Use, and Orphan Works, as well as articles about copyright and links to other helpful sites, such as the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO).
The site varies from presenting basic information, referred to as “101” (as in Copyright 101), to the language of legislation, so it serves as a good tool for starting to learn about copyright, as well as for diving into the subject more deeply. Assuming that the site will be updated with current legislation and topics, it can serve as a good resource for any organization.

Harris, L. E. (2009). Copyright Questions and Answers. Blogspot.com. Retrieved February 19, 2009, from http://www.copyrightanswers.blogspot.com/

This blog offers a place for anyone to ask a copyright question and have it answered by Lesley Ellen Harris, a lawyer, teacher, and author in the copyright field. She breaks the blog into categories, one specifically for museum-related questions. The posts that appear on the main page are those which she has answered in her Q&A column in The Copyright & New Media Law Newsletter. The comment sections allow viewers to read questions and answers pertaining to a category topic and to post comments of their own. Harris also offers information regarding online courses which anyone can take to learn more about copyright.
Harris is an expert and professional in the field of copyright law. She has written the Q&A section of The Copyright & New Media Law Newsletter since 2006, and four books on the subject. She teaches online courses and offers consultation and legal information. The blog offers project managers a resource for asking specific questions when they hit a bump in the road or a resource to subscribe to get updated information and to see concerns others have regarding copyright.

Hirtle, P. B. (2009). Copyright Term and the Public Domain in the United States. Cornell Copyright Information Center. Retrieved February 19, 2009, from http://www.copyright.cornell.edu/public_domain/

This document offers a quick reference for determining whether or not a work is in the public domain. There are still unanswered questions after referring to the document, but it does offer guidelines for what terms affect a work, in determining whether it is in the public domain. However, Hirtle’s footnotes and links to other sources can be very helpful for either answering questions that may arise after looking at the chart, or providing sources to help answer them. Copyright issues within the U.S. are the main focus. However, some international concerns are mentioned. The document also covers two different types of works: sound recordings and architectural works. It will be updated each year to account for changing terms and to provide their corresponding dates.
Hirtle’s chart is a great asset for determining whether a particular work or object is in the public domain, and for providing an easier way to understand all of the aspects of copyright issues. It is a great tool to have on hand for any digitization project.
Due to the interactive nature of the Slider (mentioned above), it could be seen as easier to use and interpret than Hirtle’s chart. The user takes known facts and gets direct results (in some cases – in others, there may not be a concrete answer provided because further research is required). However, Hirtle’s chart provides more detailed scenarios and refers to specific types of works, but in a format that involves more concentration. It may be best to consult both tools, but to consult the Slider first to get a basic premise and then look at Hirtle’s chart for further clarification.

Metadata

Conducting Research. (n.d). The J. Paul Getty Trust. Retrieved March 3, 2009, from http://www.getty.edu/research/conducting_research/

The Research Institute at the Getty Center offers numerous activities and scholarly resources that are particularly helpful for digitizing collections in visual arts museums. This is the main page of their Conducting Research section. Under the heading of Standards and Vocabularies are links for three different types of vocabularies which are compliant with NISO and ISO standards. “They contain terms, names, and other information about people, places, things, and concepts relating to art, architecture, and material culture.” The vocabularies covered are: The Art and Architecture Thesaurus (AAT); The Union List of Artist Names (ULAN) – which includes biographical information, variant names, pseudonyms, etc.); and The Getty Thesaurus of Geographical Names (TGN) – which focuses on places important for the study of art and architecture. A fourth vocabulary list mentioned on the Learn About the Getty Vocabularies page is still under development but may be released in 2011: The Cultural Objects Name Authority (CONA). The last link in the list—Data Standards and Guidelines—is covered in detail below.
These vocabularies and thesauruses are indispensable for arts museums in more ways than just creating consistency in developing metadata for a digitization project. For any project manager, these resources could provide consistency in, and control of, whatever their specific digitization project might involve.

Data Standards and Guidelines. (n.d.). J. Paul Getty Trust. Retrieved March 3, 2009, from http://www.getty.edu/research/conducting_research/standards/

This page on the Research Institute at the Getty Center website focuses on data standards and guidelines. The subject areas include links to the Categories for the Description of Works of Art (covered at length below); Introduction to Archival Organization and Description (1998); Introduction to Art Image Access (2002) – an electronic version of a book which discusses the issues concerned when documenting a visual collection, so that it can be appropriately accessed by users; Introduction to Imaging (2003) – a publication about the process and issues to be concerned with when creating a digital image collection; Introduction to Metadata (2008) (briefly mentioned below); Metadata Standards Crosswalk (2009) – a chart which provides the mapping elements of twelve different metadata schemas for interoperability.
This website page provides a link to the Categories for the Description of Works of Art (CDWA). The CDWA website page offers an introduction to CDWA, an overview of the categories that make up the framework, definitions for those categories, and CDWA Lite, a subset of the CDWA elements. Links are then provided for specific categories under two different headings – Object, Architecture or Group and Authorities/Vocabulary Control – and an in-depth explanation is given of each, along with its subcategories. Sources are provided to find authoritative terminology to create museum-specific controlled lists (a couple of these sources can be found on this site and are covered above). And finally, Getty’s website explains how the categories of the work record relate to one another and how best to handle repetition and similar categories.
Because there are so many different types of schemas available, having one that is specific to cultural objects will greatly help a museum digitization project or program. The CDWA is an established framework, created from the Art Information Task Force (AITF) and funded by the reputable organizations of the J. Paul Getty Trust, the National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) and the College Art Association (CAA). Using a format like the CDWA will bring consistency to a digitization project. Regardless of the collection, whether it’s an analogous collection or a diverse one, using a framework will make the results of a project more useful and successful to users. Furthermore, even if project managers do not have the knowledge to handle or direct the metadata process themselves and have someone else handle it, a resource like this will be valuable to the entire project team when they think about the scope of metadata and what outcome it makes possible. The page can be a bit overwhelming when you see how much information is presented there, but it is worth it in the end.

Understanding Metadata. (2004). National Information Standards Organization (NISO). Retrieved March 1, 2009, from http://www.niso.org/publications/press/UnderstandingMetadata.pdf

This article is a good source for getting a solid, basic knowledge of metadata. It breaks down the meaning of metadata by explaining the various aspects of its function and how it is structured. It then briefly describes the most common metadata schemes being used today. One scheme mentioned is the Categories for the Descriptions of Works of Art (CDWA), which will help with museum collections in particular (discussed above). Examples using metadata are provided to help the reader understand the steps involved and where the complexity comes from. Other topics include the creation of metadata, interoperability and crosswalks, as well as future directions for metadata. Finally, the article offers a bibliography for further information and a glossary of terms.
Even though Getty’s “Introduction to Metadata” (discussed above) may be a bit hard to digest, due to its being produced by the Getty organization – an organization dedicated to research, especially within the museum field – it does relate metadata to museums more, while “Understanding Metadata” sticks to libraries as its focus. Both sources have their positives and negatives, yet still act as good sources for learning about metadata. However, it may be best to read this article first in order to get an introductory look at metadata before taking a look at Getty’s. This article describes metadata in a more understandable manner by relating it to traditional library practices, and it gives clearer explanations of what terms mean.
Metadata is a complex part of digitization projects. Therefore, having more than one source to review will be best. This resource offers a good starting point, but doing further research or having someone who is more familiar with metadata on the project team would be required.

Digital Imaging/Digitization

BCR’s CDP Digital Imaging Best Practices Version 2.0. (2008, June). BCR. Retrieved March 27, 2009, from http://www.bcr.org/cdp/best/digital-imaging-bp.pdf

This document takes an extensive look at digital practices in cultural heritage organizations (CHOs). It takes into consideration the expectations for CHOs to have a primary concern for image quality and sustainability. The document covers topics such as starting a digitizing project, learning capturing basics, understanding hardware and software, creating digital images, controlling quality, using metadata, and storing material. There are also nine appendices, which include a bibliography, a glossary, a list of physical and environmental requirements for a data center, and additional information about color management.
The document was generated by the Bibliographical Center for Research (BCR), which consists of the Collaborative Digitization Program (CDP), formerly known as the Colorado Digitization Program. The BCR gathered its information for the document from BCR members, other digitization colleagues, and well-researched literature written by experts in the field. This ensures that the information presented is based on current projects that consider the most recent methods and technologies available.
Technology changes rapidly. Therefore, museums and other CHOs need to have resources that inform them of changing trends, new discoveries, software, hardware, and best digitizing practices. The document is a new edition of CDP’s first version, which was done in 2003. Over the course of five years, much can change. Hopefully, in another five years the BCR will revise this document once again, so CHOs can continue to be kept up to date on the best methods for carrying out their digitization projects and preserving such projects.

JISC Digital Media. (2009). Retrieved March 27, 2009, from http://www.jiscdigitalmedia.ac.uk/
This website is based in the UK at the University of Bristol and used to be known as the Technical Advisory Service for Images (TASI). It offers great personal advice for certain organizations in the UK, but anyone can access their online documents. It has much to offer, including advice (in the form of written documents) and resources on how to bring digital media to users and how to educate using your collections. There are documents on various topics, including managing digitization projects, creating and delivering digital images, and finding and using digital images. A Frequently Asked Questions section is available for most of the main topics covered. Furthermore, a resource page offers direct links to websites and tools, covering such ideas as: metadata vocabularies; case studies; useful books, magazines, and online publications; and funding sources for digitization projects. A glossary is available for image terminology and digitization terms, as well as acronyms. Finally, there is a blog which discusses current “digital imaging news and views.”
The site is a user-friendly, comprehensive resource for all topics and steps regarding a digitization process and offers a location for the most up-to-date information in the field. Their team of approximately 12 staff members works to seek out helpful sites and services, to conduct interviews to bring back useful information about what other organizations have done for their own projects, and to act as professionals in their field who can also teach others about the digitization process. Therefore, the organization is made up of a team who is always knowledgeable about current issues of digitization and, consequently, presents that knowledge on their website.
The site is geared towards still images, moving images, and sound resources. However, much of the information provided is still useful for other media. Because the site is based in the UK, many of its case studies and links refer to other organizations and sites there, but it is still a good source of information, as digitization personnel all over the world deal with similar issues. This site would be helpful to a project manager because it offers a “one stop shopping” experience for finding out a great deal of information without having to do individual searches to find answers to various questions.

Outsourcing

Conversion Specifications. (n.d). Library of Congress American Memory. Retrieved April 4, 2009, from http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/techdocs/conversion.html

This page provides links to three different requests for proposals (RFPs) published by the Library of Congress. The documents represent the final versions, up to the point where the contractor was chosen. Any modifications done thereafter in collaboration with the contractor are not included. The three RFPs are for these projects: “Digital Images from Original Documents, Text Conversion and SGML-Encoding” (1996); “Conversion of Microfilm to Digital Images” (1996); and “Conversion of Pictorial Materials to Digital Images (1997).”
The documents lay out every aspect of the projects, which can not only aid project managers and team members to create their own RFP documents, but also see the standards, specifications, scheduling, handling requirements, etc., for a project completed by the Library of Congress, which could help a team plan a project from the beginning. The documents are lengthy, due to the size of the projects that the Library of Congress performs and the detail they go into. However, they would still be worth the time to examine. The documents are also over ten years old, which has an impact on the technical aspects of the digitization, although the mere outline of the documents, the contract language, how information is presented, and what is included are still viable.

RLG Guidelines for Creating a Request for Proposal for Digital Imaging Services (Including Text Conversion and Encoding). (1998). OCLC. Retrieved April 5, 2009, from
http://www.oclc.org/programs/ourwork/past/digimgtools/RFPGuidelines.pdf

This document provides guidelines for creating a request for proposal (RFP). It breaks the proposal document up into sections, including an introduction and project overview, timelines, evaluation guidelines, responsibilities of the institution and vendor, etc. Each section is broken down further into the components that should be included in it.
There are no examples to go along with the document, so it can be difficult to truly get a feeling for what is required or how it should be worded. However, to help a project team with more of the specifics of writing an RFP, the sources above in Conversion Specifications are examples from Library of Congress projects.

Preservation

Cornell University Library. (2007). Digital Preservation Management: Implementing Short-term Strategies for Long-term Problems. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research (ICPSR). Retrieved April 18, 2009, from http://www.library.cornell.edu/iris/tutorial/dpm/

This source is a tutorial on digital preservation. It is set within the context of the Reference Model for an Open Archival Information System (OAIS) and Attributes of a Trusted Digital Repository (TDR) (discussed individually below). The goal of the tutorial is to help the user establish a viable digital preservation program. After viewing a timeline that illustrates the key events in technology that pertain to digital preservation, the tutorial offers explanations and definitions for terms and concepts, along with a list of online glossaries for preservation terms. Obsolescence and physical threats to digital media, hardware, and software, as well as the challenges for such tasks as selecting assets, conquering legal issues, and funding, are also briefly covered. In the Foundations section, the main focus is a summarization of the documents for TDR and OAIS, but it ends with an explanation of how the TDR framework and the OAIS model can be combined. Finally, the Program Component section explains three elements that are needed to create and maintain a preservation program: an organizational policy framework, a technological plan, and a plan for continued support from necessary resources.
The tutorial takes the reader through the process of preservation, using easy-to-understand language and explanations. It provides a good introductory overview of the topic that can help explain what is involved in the task, yet offers further resources on the subject for future reading and research on specific topics.
The ICPSR maintains and hosts the tutorial, updating its content and improving its presentation based on user feedback. The tutorial is also presented and maintained in conjunction with a couple of five-day workshops offered each year at ICPSR’s location in Michigan.

Trusted Digital Repositories: Attributes and Responsibilities. (2002). OCLC. Retrieved April 4, 2009, from http://www.oclc.org/programs/ourwork/past/trustedrep/repositories.pdf

This is the final report created by RLG and OCLC for what constitutes a digital repository and what responsibilities they hold. The document is based on the Reference Model for an Open Archival Information System (OAIS) (discussed briefly below). The document first defines what a trusted digital repository is and what attributes it should possess in order to be seen as trustworthy. It then goes into recommendations for what needs to be done before a universally followed plan can be created to build and maintain trustworthy repositories based on standard practices.
Appendix A of the document is worth mentioning separately. It provides an overview of the open archival information system (OAIS) framework model for preserving and maintaining access to digital information for the long term. The components of the model are broken up and discussed individually to make them more comprehensible. Although this is just an overview, it can provide a context for what is discussed in the main portion of the document. The OAIS model continues to be used and referred to widely. Considering such a model right from the beginning of a project could not only give the project direction and consistency, but also help save money and make it more compatible with other institutions’ projects, because it is so widely used.
Digital preservation is an ongoing process that will continue to change. The document presents seven recommendations that RLG and OCLC, as well as repository organizations in general, will need to follow in order to make a comprehensive, internationally accepted digital preservation plan. In the future, one should be on the lookout for an updated version of this document or perhaps a more detailed account of what they propose for the future. Meanwhile, the current version provides necessary information for understanding what is essential for a trustworthy digital repository and, therefore, helps to make clear what is needed in order to bring that to fruition. This is a non-technological approach to preserving digital assets – meaning more of an administrative and organizational approach. Combined with the more technical plan presented in the OAIS model, an organization using this resource would be better equipped to comprehensively tackle digital preservation.

Costs

RLG Worksheet for Estimating Digital Reformatting Costs. (1997). RLG. Retrieved April 10, 2009, from http://worldcat.org/arcviewer/1/OCC/2007/08/08/0000070511/viewer/file2733.pdf

This worksheet is a guide for creating a digitization budget. It breaks up costs into eleven categories and provides a worksheet for each step. The majority of the elements involve personnel costs, so that table repeats in many categories. Other forms are provided for determining the size of the collection to be digitized; for determining image costs, text conversion costs, and SGML encoding costs; and for finding aid conversion costs, if appropriate.
An appendix at the end of the document gives information for determining what type of digital image capture equipment should be used, based on the physical attributes of the work. Seven different scanning devices are considered. For the most part, this information seems to still be relevant today; however, some of the technological enhancements and the obsolescence of scanning devices may be a consideration.
The worksheet would be a good tool for estimating costs for a project, or it could act as a template for creating a guide adapted to a specific project or organization. Regardless of cost concerns, the appendix offers useful information for the selection process, to determine what types of scanning devices will be required and whether new equipment, or perhaps an outside vendor, may be needed. If the latter be the case, the worksheet and the steps for selecting the scanning will provide useful information for creating vendor requests and contracts.

Miscellaneous

Agnew, G. (2006). Staffing Roles for Digital Collection Building. New Jersey Digital Highway. Retrieved February 5, 2009, from
http://www.njdigitalhighway.org/documents/staffing-roles-for-digital-collection-building.pdf

Agnew’s article provides a condensed discussion of staffing roles for a digitization project. She briefly mentions using in-house staff, outsourcing components of the project, and working collaboratively with other institutions. A concise table is provided with 19 different roles to be filled, a description of skills required for each role, and recommendations for how those roles can be filled internally or externally.
Grace Agnew is the Associate University Librarian for Digital Library Systems at Rutgers University Libraries and has written several articles posted on the New Jersey Digital Highway website.
Each organization is different, made up of a variety of positions, with staff that have different skill sets. Therefore, a project team must analyze the resources they already have available to them within their staff and what resources they may have easy access to, such as qualified volunteers. In order to use staff in the best way possible to get the best result, consulting a table such as the one included in this article can simplify the needs of the project and direct a team and project manager to finding the right staff member, vendors, and/or consultants to carry out the project.

Chun, S., & Jenkins, M. (2006, December 15). Why Digital Asset Management? A Case Study. RLG DigiNews. Retrieved March 21, 2009, from http://worldcat.org/arcviewer/1/OCC/2007/07/10/0000068924/viewer/file1.html#article1

This article focuses on steps the Metropolitan Museum of Art took to create its three-year digitization project called Met Images. It offers a good look at a major museum embarking – and at the time of the article, nearing completion – on one of the most comprehensive studies of a digitization plan for its organization, and at how its plans and goals changed through the process. Discussions cover the initial research they performed, how they gained financial approval from their board, their use of social tagging for describing collection objects, assessment of the collections and the digital assets they possessed, and who would manage the system. A brief discussion is also given of some key issues regarding technology, image creation, and cataloging.
The authors are mentioned as working at the MET, but it is not clear what roles exactly they had in the MET Images project.
The article is an excellent source for showing how museum projects can change throughout the process and how the concepts behind digitization have changed over the years. Since the article was written in late 2006, some of the information may be outdated, but the more a museum can examine the processes fellow museums go through for digitization projects, the more likely they are to accumulate important information that will help them make better decisions, which will lead to future organizations learning in turn.

Covey, D. T. (2002). Usage and Usability Assessment: Library Practices and Concerns. Digital Library Federation. Retrieved February 26, 2009, from http://www.clir.org/pubs/abstract/pub105abst.html

This report is based on numerous interviews conducted with library professionals regarding the assessment of the use and usability of online collections and services. Covey explains why certain methods are used, gives examples of what the method could be used for, evaluates what worked and what didn’t, and describes how to use the data collected from the assessments. She also describes challenges that are inherent in the assessments and gives examples from her interviews. The three main assessing methods she covers are survey questionnaires, focus groups, and user protocols. An additional electronic method is also discussed: transaction log analysis (TLA). This is a process where computer software is used to track what a user does while using a system. The data collected can then be analyzed to see how a program can be improved. Finally, an extensive bibliography is provided, with sources organized according to the methods discussed.
These methods have been, and can be, used to evaluate the effectiveness of websites and the user interfaces of digital collections or databases. They can help in designing a site from the ground up, providing improvements to an already established digital collection, or doing a complete overhaul in order to make a collection more functional for the user. Therefore, a report like this can provide much-needed information for a project manager to determine who their audience is and what they need and want, and it can assist in the development of digital collections and services that fit. However, these methods can be used for any field, not just libraries, and not just for online collections and service assessments. Museums could use these ideas in any area or department of the organization.

Digital Corner. (n.d). Institute of Museum and Library Services. Retrieved March 26, 2009, from
http://www.imls.gov/about/digitalcorner.asp

This web page provides several links to resources regarding different aspects of the topic of the Digital Revolution in museums, archives, and libraries. One notable resource is the “Status of Technology and Digitization in the Nation's Museums and Libraries” (2004). The article discusses the “kinds of technology in use, the extent of digitization activities, and the adoption, maintenance, funding of, and staffing for technology and digitization activities at museums and libraries.” An Afterword offers a summary of discussions conducted with participants, asking them to state what is coming next and what some of the major issues are in their realm of the digital world. The “Assessment of End-User Needs in IMLS-Funded Digitization Projects” (2003) is an article which stems from a study to determine how museums and libraries are assessing the needs of their users and what can be done to determine if they are meeting their users’ needs. A third source is “A Framework of Guidance for Building Good Digital Collections” (2007). This article is meant for cultural heritage organizations and offers major components for creating good digital collections and locating resources to consult, and discusses how communities should participate in the development of digital practices. The page also provides links to information about digital-based conferences and digital project grants offered by IMLS.
This page is an ideal source of information because it offers such a variety of sources on different aspects of a digitization project. Many of the sources are either based on studies of numerous organizations working with digital projects or based on workshops or conferences which provide insights from a range of sources and experiences. The page can also be frequently consulted for more recent studies as they become available. The study Status of Technology and Digitization in the Nation's Museums and Libraries is a more recent version of a study conducted in 2001. Periodically, IMLS will feel that a past study should be conducted again to offer the most up-to-date information as possible.

Digitise My Collection. (n.d). Collections Link. Retrieved April 11, 2009, from
http://www.collectionslink.org.uk/digitise_my_collection

Collections Link is based in the UK but serves as an international collections management advisory service. The digitization page offers information and resources for various steps in the digitization process. The question “Why Digitize?” is considered, and in the Implementing Digitization section there are numerous links for topics like Project Management, Copyright, Preservation, and a Digitization Business Model for sustaining a project’s results into the future. This section also introduces the concept of the Digitization Life Cycle, which is an interesting way of viewing the process. It breaks the treatment into four parts – Planning, Processing, Preservation, and Presentation – and provides links for further information about each part. One section points the reader to the Technical Advisory Service for Images (TASI) (now known as JISC Digital Media), which is discussed above. Another important source this site provides is the Good Practice Guide for Developers of Cultural Heritage Web Services. Portions of the guide are referenced throughout the Collections Link website. This will be covered individually below, because it discusses a topic not already covered in this annotated bibliography – websites.
Collections Link provides advice and support to museums, libraries, and archives on the care and management of collections. Collections Link is managed by the Collections Trust, the UK's independent organization for collections, and works in collaboration with 20 professional groups.
All-inclusive sites such as this can be very useful for gaining a large amount of information in one location and knowing that it is all compatible and tested. Sources like these also include links to other helpful and related sites, to continue the learning curve or simply to offer further information. The UK is a leader in researching and developing best practices, so that staying connected to the resources they have to offer can only help a digitization project.

Erway, R. & Schaffner, J. (2007). Shifting Gears: Gearing Up to Get Into the Flow. OCLC Programs and Research. Retrieved February 22, 2007, from http://www.oclc.org/programs/publications/reports/2007-02.pdf

This essay was based on a forum called “Digitization Matters,” which challenged its speakers and audience to think on a different level, to “go out on a limb” and provoke discussion. It briefly discusses eight different approaches to, or elements of, the digitization process. Topics like the dilemma between quantity and quality, what works or objects are best to select for digitization, and methods of getting useful research for object descriptions are discussed. Finding new ways to get digitized works to the user and utilizing the entire staff throughout the process are also covered.
This article reminds project managers and digitization teams to get back to basics, to think about why they are digitizing. It takes the focus away from the technical side and allows readers to regroup and remind themselves why they are digitizing and for whom. At the same time, it brings up key questions, concerns, and elements of the process, and digitization results that should be heavily considered and debated about within an organization. The essay offers a different view of digitization to get program managers thinking about what is important to their organization and how they want to proceed.

Good Practice Guide for Developers of Cultural Heritage Web Services. (2008). UKOLN. Retrieved April 11, 2009, from http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/interop-focus/gpg/

In one form or another, this handbook covers each part of the Digitization Life Cycle mentioned above in the Collections Link resource. It discusses managing intellectual property rights, staffing, and projects as a whole, plus technical aspects of the digitization process, metadata, preservation, marketing, and publicity. However, a unique portion of the guide refers to web sites – the presentation of the digitized collection. There are sections for advice and guidance on best practices for setting up websites, and information on usability and accessibility, content management systems, collaborative technologies and more.
UKOLN is based in the University of Bath and strives “to inform practice and influence policy in the areas of: digital libraries, metadata and resource discovery, distributed library and information systems, bibliographic management, and web technologies.” This organization in general may be a worthwhile source to look into.
Starting in 2006, it was decided that the handbook would be updated regularly, thereby providing an ever-current source. Because websites continue to be the main tool for presenting a collection to the public, it is important to keep up-to-date on new developments, as well as to do the necessary legwork to make the initial presentation of the site to the public, the best it can be.

Reilly, B. (2000). Collections: Museum Collections Online. Retrieved February 22, 2009, from http://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/pub88/coll-museum.html

Museums do not have the means to present all of their collections at the same time. However, now, with the capabilities of the Internet, museums can come close. This article explains some examples of how digitizing a museum collection and presenting it online can be more cost effective for “getting” the collection out there and for how “the experience and understanding of the original work can be enriched beyond what is possible in print.” It also briefly mentions the main disadvantage: now museums will also have to care for surrogate files and metadata as well as their originals. In addition, the article identifies factors that are affecting what objects museums are choosing to put on the web and why. Finally, the article offers three possibilities for how museums and libraries may use the Web in the future to present their collections.
This article is a good overview and introduction to the advantages and issues museums will have when developing an online digitization project. Because of its introductory level, it would be a good article to have on hand for those who are not familiar with such a task. Furthermore, a project manager could get an idea of some key aspects and ideas which could then be looked into further.

Conclusion

The list above merely scratches the surface of the resources that are available for digitizing projects. Along with other sources not mentioned, and resources that are being created right now, many of the articles, documents, or particular web pages discussed here come from sites that have other sources and helpful content. I may have only discussed one particular article from a website which has much more to offer, so exploring further will lead you to other helpful resources, allowing for more focused research on specific topics.
As a member of a listserv in the museum field, I know how helpful they can be. Therefore, I see a listserv like PADI’s as a resounding asset to any digitization project member.
Organizations and individuals all over the world are conducting studies, gathering information, and learning from practice, and are working to present that new-found knowledge to the rest of us. So always be on the look out for new, up-to-date resources.