Evaluating Cultural Heritage Information Access Systems: a contribution from the archival domain Mariella Guercio Digilab, Sapienza Università di Roma IRCDL 2013

panel topics 1.Cultural Heritage Information Access System vs Digital Library: similarities and differences 2.Accessing Raw Material vs interpretation and curated presentation of such material 3.Dimensions of the User Experience 4.Evaluation coordinates: quality and completeness of the information, tools to make sense out of it, usability, accessibility, open access,…

the definition proposed by DELOS Manifesto (2007) “a tool at the center of intellectual activity having no logical, conceptual, physical, temporal or personal borders or barriers to information” which has shifted “from a content-centric system that merely supports the organization and provision of access to particular collections of data and information, to a person- centric system that delivers innovative, evolving, and personalized services to users”

key questions still unsolved for the evaluation process A framework for the evaluation not yet well defined Not enough attention for the efficient capacity of retrieving and managing DL contents when peculiar frameworks have to be supported Advanced functionality is rarely supported The role of the intermediation has been not adequately considered and investigated

the complex translation into the web of archival finding aids systems and resources uniqueness of the archival resources and complexity of their reciprocal relations (strategic for making them understandable) massive volumes (approximately 8000 km in Italy) which limit the role of the digitization process in this area: the future (and the present) finding aids system will focus (at least for the next decade) on analogue records to be accessed in the traditional reference services: only few resources will have the privilege of a digital fruition in its contents risk of fragmentation and arbitrary criteria for selection: i.e. the thematic channels can be useful for attracting audience but not for providing services to the scientific communities and to the citizens needs The ambiguity of the concepts involved has prevented the archival sector by using the term DL: archival websites or archival information systems are the preferred terms and the preferred scenario for developing services and functionality, while the term DL is at the moment rarely used for proposing online publication of digital archival resources in dedicated environment<

challenges and best practices It is crucial to identify and evaluate the best research projects and, if possible, good practices already available to sustain future cooperation in the field and to support. The Italian scientific projects and good practices here identified (just as examples of promising services for future development and a more comprehensive analysis) include: –SIAR (Sistema informativo archivistico regionale del Veneto) –Biblioteca digitale della Lombardia –Sistema archivistico nazionale in connection with CulturaItalia –Sapienza Digital Library

the SIAR (Sistema informativo archivistico regionale del Veneto) experience As noted by the researchers involved in the project (Agosto, Ferro, Silvello) the SIAR has been created with the aim of integrating distributed archives by using both standards, methodology and tools developed for digital libraries and for specific domain, but also for exchanging or sharing metadata At the moment the integration for research services is not explicit and the catalogues are maintained separate

Biblioteca digitale della Lombardia The aim is the digitization and online publication of cross-domain cultural resources able to testify the regional cultural heritage. Basic requirements are: acquisition and online availability (through a regional web portal) of significant resources of regional culture integration of resources preserved and created in different environment, including archival documents long-term preservation of digital resources compliance with the main standards cooperation with the main national and international projects (Europeana, CulturaItalia and Sistema archivistico nazionale)

Sapienza digital library: mandate and mission Aggregating and making accessible in a digital form cross domain information content with various nature and provenance created by Sapienza University research communities or made available by corporate bodies or individuals in relation to the academic environment. Harmonizing the descriptive practices for new resources (not easily ascribable to a specific domain) by adopting with some degree of “creativity and imagination” national standards and recommendations

Sapienza digital library: vocabolari controllati PICO (Portale della Cultura Italiana) 4.3 MibAc TGN (Thesaurus of geographic names) Getty e Geonames Nuovo soggettario di Firenze VIAF Virtual International Authority file Vocabolari controllati disciplinari Authority file dei soggetti produttori/conservatori/versanti

Sapienza digital library: tracking contextual information – archivio IRTEM - 1

Sapienza digital library: tracking contextual information – archivio IRTEM - 2

Italian projects: a critical state of art provenance and context are not always identified as crucial components archival standards are recognized but not yet completely implemented outside the archival information systems compliance with European standards is ensured but mainly as a static and flat model for representation: more attention should be dedicated to the critical analysis of the European network APANET, now APEX the main difficulties concern –the differentiation of digital resources (many projects are limited to the identification of single resources and have developed simple research interfaces), –the low level of integration and cooperation among institutions both at regional and at national level and of course –the lack of financial resources Integration (and not convergence) among heterogeneous cultural information access systems is the key word

DL retrieval: it cannot be a question of miraculous fishing A balance is required between specificity, details and general perspective The functionality for retrieval must be easy but not trivial New forms for intermediation are required (particularly when digital resources are complex and articulated)