Home » Posts tagged 'digitization' (Page 4)
Tag Archives: digitization
Wait! Don’t digitize and discard!
Some libraries, library organizations, and library managements believe they can "manage" their collections better by first digitizing historic collections of books and other paper and ink information sources and then weeding their collections of these materials. Such projects will reduce the number of copies held in the aggregate by all libraries (Lavoie, Schonfeld, Schottlaender, Yano). One problem that these projects often overlook is the subtle (and not so subtle) differences between the legal standing of paper and digital objects with regard to access and use. Too often, creators of digital objects attempt to impose copyright restrictions on the digital objects even if the originals were in the public domain. Additionally, digital objects are often encumbered with licenses and technological restrictions that limit how they can be used and who can use them. The digital objects are often just not as accessible or as usable as the original print. How bad would it be if we threw away our print collections in favor of digital collections that are less accessible and less usable? Randal C. Picker, who is Leffmann Professor of Commercial Law and Senior Fellow at the The Computation Institute of the University of Chicago and Argonne National Laboratory University of Chicago Law School, has written a paper and created a presentation on just this issue.
- Picker, Randal. 2013. Access and the Public Domain. Rochester, NY: University of Chicago Institute for Law & Economics. Coase-Sandor Institute For Law And Economics Working Paper No. 631.
- Picker: Access and the Public Domain (Fordham IP Talk), YouTube (Apr 6, 2013).
"This is a version of a talk that I gave at the Fordham IP Conference on April 5, 2013. It is based on my paper Access and the Public Domain, which was published in the San Diego Law Review."
- Access rights and use rights are different animals and operate in different legal settings.
- Even though the public domain is coming online, the financing models for the projects will result in efforts to restrict use ina variety of ways.
- Those efforts will be situated at the intersection of technology controls, contract, terms of use, copyright and the CFAA (Computer Fraud and Abuse Act).
- Perhaps a truly public public domain, something like the DPLA perhaps, is required to avoid the path of non-copyright control over the public domain.
The Digital-Surrogate Seal of Approval
[Update: The article is also available in the Stanford Digital Repository and the University of California Escholarship Repository.] James and I are happy to announce that our new article appears in the current edition of D-Lib Magazine:
- The Digital-Surrogate Seal of Approval: a Consumer-oriented Standard. by James A. Jacobs and James R. Jacobs. D-Lib Magazine, 2013, 19(3/4). DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1045/march2013-jacobs
When bits go bad: the Atlas of Digital Damages
Ever heard the term "bit rot" or wondered what actually happens when electronic files go bad? The Atlas of Digital Damages is a collection of files with corrupted bits, so you can visually see what happens. The Atlas is a flickr album, or rather "a staging area for collecting visual examples of digital preservation challenges, failed renderings, encoding damage, corrupt data, and visual evidence documenting #FAILs of any stripe." So, in addition to viewing these examples, you too can contribute examples to help build the Atlas' collection. A blog post by Barbara Sierman, from the National Library of the Netherlands, first posed the question and well, folks ran with the idea and created this "crowd sourced effort" to document digital degradation. See, "Where is our atlas of digital damages?".
I discovered this nifty item while reading through the November Digital Preservation Newsletter from the Library of Congress (there's lots of great project updates and information, especially on the geospatial digital preservation front in there - so go check it out!)
and check out the LOCKSS project for digital preservation approaches and methods to prevent bit rot on a large scale.
[This post was nicely sent to us by our pal Kris Kasianovitz, International, State and Local Government Information Librarian at Stanford. If others want to send us items of interest, please send them to freegovinfo AT gmail DOT com. Thanks Kris!!] Continue reading
Accuracy of Digitization
The Update on February 2012 Activities of the HathiTrust reports on research being done by the HathiTrust Research Center (HTRC) to quantify occurrences of Optical Character Recognition (OCR) errors in the HathiTrust corpus. OCR is the technology that converts a scanned image to text that can be searched and analyzed. Members of the HTRC examined 256,000 non-Google digitized volumes from HathiTrust using a clever algorithm that compared OCR text to a dictionary of known words. Using a supercomputer and a set of rules that were verified by a human expert, they found that 84.9 percent of the volumes examined (217,754 of the 256,416) had one or more OCR errors and 11% of the pages (7,745,034 of the 69,297,000) had one or more errors. The average number of errors per volume was 156. As we at FGI have argued here before, we believe that it essential to take into account OCR accuracy and error rates when digitizing paper collections. This is particularly important when digitizing books that contain statistical tables since it is harder to use current OCR technologies to accurately convert image scans to numbers than it is to convert scans to text. It is also harder to evaluate the accuracy of such conversions; you can't use a dictionary of known statistics the way you can use a dictionary of known words. (The HTRC study did not, apparently, examine accuracy of statistical table conversions.) Because of the large volume of such information in government publications, this is a very important issue as we collectively try to digitize our paper collections, evaluate their accuracy and usability, and determine how many paper copies we need to keep after digitization (see Achieving a collaborative FDLP future). Continue reading
Digitization does not magically preserve paper
May 30, 2012 / Leave a comment
When we think about the historical paper-and-ink collections that FDLP libraries have built over the last 200 years, we often wish we could make them more accessible through digitization. But we have to be careful when we think this way. One thing I have learned repeatedly as I have worked with digital information over the last twenty five years is that, in the digital world, "access" and "preservation" have to go together. When we neglect either, we lose both. Some recent writings have reinforced this old idea and are worth remembering:
- All Digital Objects are Born Digital Objects, by Trevor Owens, The Signal (May 15th, 2012).
There is no large red button that says "digitize" on it, we make decisions about what significant properties we want to record from a physical object and we work to ensure that those properties are recorded in the newly created digital object. When we talk about the scanner "digitizing" it's all too easy to forget the history of the creation of the digital object and we can easily forget that there are a range of individual and institutional authorial intentions that go into deciding what and how to digitize.
- Digitization is Different than Digital Preservation: Help Prevent Digital Orphans!, by Kristin Snawder, The Signal (July 15th, 2011).
Many institutions see the immediate value of having materials available electronically. This is valid reasoning. Many researchers no longer want to come and see the materials. They want access from the comfort of their own couch and fuzzy slippers. But, in the hurry to meet user expectations, institutions may scan large quantities of materials without having a solid plan for preserving the digital images into the future.
-
Approaching Digitisation Through A Digital Preservation Perspective. by Alenka Kavčič-Čolić. Presented at the SEEDI (South-Eastern European Digitisation Initiative) 2012, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Most libraries still conceive digitisation as a digital reproduction aimed to provide access to library materials only. The master files resulted from digitisation are usually not digitally preserved and the digital collections run the risk of being lost for the future.
The above examples are about short-term thinking and lack of planning when libraries aim for access without planning for preservation. The same mistake can be made the other way, too: when libraries plan for preservation without access. Paul Conway made this point more than 15 years ago: Continue reading →Continue Reading →