University of California, Berkeley DOCAM04: SIMS & Document Academy Conference 2004 Media Convergence – A Myth Considered Michael Buckland, University of California, Berkeley buckland@sims.berkeley.edu Berkeley, Oct 24, 2004

Society operates through documents. Documents dominate our lives! So there is a great need to study the nature and use of documents -- and it is not simply a question of technology. A myth is a powerful belief. It may or may not be true, but the belief is influential. “Media convergence” is a myth. It is a powerful belief. What could “media convergence” mean? How media convergence be tested? -- How measured? Maybe “Convergence” means increased interoperability. How can documents can become more convergent? – or less?

1. Phenomenological aspect: Documents are objects perceived as signifying something. The status of being a “document” is not inherent but attributed (given to) an object. Meanings are always constructed by observers. 2. Cultural codes: All forms of expression depend on some some shared understandings, language in a broad sense. Convergence here is cultural convergence or interpretation. Character Status 3. Media Types: Different type of expression have evolved: Texts, images, numbers, diagrams, art … 4. Physical Media: Paper; film; analog magnetic tape; bits;…. Anything perceived as a DOCUMENT (=1) has cultural (2), type (3), and physical (4) aspects. Being digital affects directly only aspect 4. Limited benefit in studying only digital documents.

Example: Moving between two media types, both digital. Text Social datasets It is difficult to move between different kinds of document. For example: A numeric dataset of social statistics and passages of text. You cannot use text to search among numbers -- or numbers to search texts.

Text TOPIC LIST Captions Social datasets Different media types on the same topic can be linked indirectly via topical metadata, but in the case of numeric social data you need to specify place also.

Text TOPIC LIST Maps GAZETTEER Captions Social datasets Normalizing place names requires a gazetteer -- and latitude and longitude allow points on maps. But the time period is also needs to be specified . . .

Text TOPIC LIST Maps GAZETTEER Captions Social datasets TIME PERIOD DIRECTORY Timeline Chronology So, one can normalize time terminology and calendar.

BIOG. DICT. Text TOPIC LIST Maps GAZETTEER Captions Social datasets TIME PERIOD DIRECTORY Timeline Chronology Similarly with personal names . . . etc.

BIOG. DICT. 2 BIOG. DICT. TOPIC LIST 3 Text 2 TOPIC LIST 2 Text TOPIC LIST Maps GAZETTEER Captions Social GAZETTEER 2 etc datasets GAZETTEER 3 TIME PERIOD DIRECTORY Time line TIME PERIOD DIRECTORY 2 Chronology TIME PERIOD DIRECTORY 3 Many resources exist . . . and many for normalizing

BIOG. DICT. 2 WHO WHAT BIOG. DICT. TOPIC LIST 3 Text 2 TOPIC LIST 2 Text TOPIC LIST WHERE Maps GAZETTEER Captions Social GAZETTEER 2 etc datasets GAZETTEER 3 WHEN TIME PERIOD DIRECTORY Time line TIME PERIOD DIRECTORY 2 Chronology TIME PERIOD DIRECTORY 3 Many resources exist . . . and many for normalizing

Descriptive metadata constitute an “intermediate infrastructure” to compensate for lack of convergence. So document convergence comes INDIRECTLY through an infrastructure of DOCUMENTATION (e.g. Topic list; gazetteer; time period directory; biographical dictionary; etc.) or comparable algorithmic infrastructure. Suggestion: Bibliographic access depended on stable points of reference. Traditionally, perfected for published printed books: Author, title, publisher, place and date of publication. But these points are unstable / unclear with “new media.” So new / different / more general and stable points of reference are needed. Perhaps: WHAT, WHERE, WHEN, WHO?

1. Phenomenological aspect: Documents are objects perceived as signifying something. The status of being a “document” is not inherent but attributed (given to) an object. Meanings are always constructed by observers. 2. Cultural codes: All forms of expression depend on some some shared understandings, language in a broad sense. Convergence here is cultural convergence or interpretation. Character Status 3. Media Types: Different type of expression have evolved: Texts, images, numbers, diagrams, art … 4. Physical Media: Paper; film; analog magnetic tape; bits;…. Convergence (at least, interoperability) is understood for no 4. How should / could 1, 2, and 3 become more convergent? I thank: Niels W. Lund, Marc Davis, the Institute for Museum & Library Services, and others for helpful discussions.