[OpenGLAM] OpenGLAM principles v.0.2. - input welcome!

[Sebastiaan ter Burg]

Hello everyone,

I agree with the earlier comments. I know these are just principles, but
they do make me think of the 5 star model of open data. This model also
affects open content of GLAMS. The open images project in The Netherlands
made me think about this, they were building upon an open stack:

1. Open source software (partly applicable, only when the GLAM publishes
the content themselves)
2. Open formats (e.g. FLAC/Ogg instead of WAV)
3. Open licenses (already covered in these principles)
4. Open access (API available)

This might reach to far for a set of principles, but I think openness for
GLAMS is more than just licenses and we should avoid giving that impression.

Best,

Sebastiaan




2013/4/22 Sam Leon <sam.leon at okfn.org>

> Hi Fae,
>
> I like this especially how simple it is and I think the axes you have here
> of preservation, access and engagement really stand out.
>
> I wonder whether these two "documents" could be combined. The simpler one
> that you forward being part of a punchy preamble that conveys the core of
> *why* this is important with some more detailed principles that follow on
> to aid those who are making slightly more complex decisions around which
> open license to adopt for instance.
>
> A lot of this discussion has come round to who is the audience for these
> principles or manifestos. My thinking on this we are trying to address two
> core audiences, although it might prove that slightly different documents
> are required in each case:
>
>    - People working within GLAMs - to give a clear and compelling
>    statement on the guiding ideas behind openness in GLAMs as a means to
>    encouraging institutional reform and open avocates within institutions
>    - Those from the open content and open data movement (including some
>    GLAM professionals themselves of course!) - so that the
>    many organisations working in this field (Creative Commons, Wikimedia, Open
>    Knowledge Foundation etc) can agree on a loose set of principles around
>    which we can consolidate our efforts
>
> I'd be interested to hear other people's thoughts as to whether this
> forking of documents is required or whether we could combine the two (as
> proposed above) with a punchier, simpler statement as a pre-amble to some
> more detailed principles.
>
> All the best,
> Sam
>
>
>
> On 22 April 2013 10:39, Fae <fae at wikimedia.org.uk> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> As part of a Wikimedia initiative, I tried a different tack a while back,
>> and started drafting a simple "manifesto", primarily for funding bodies to
>> consider rather than GLAMs. If the funding bodies adopt simple principles
>> when prioritizing funding, this naturally flows to all of our GLAM
>> programmes. As with many such ideas it has sat on the back-burner for a
>> while, it would be nice to see something as simple as this be a front end
>> for more details principles, possibly expressed with the different types of
>> audience in mind.
>>
>> You can find my draft on-wiki at:
>> http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Open_Knowledge_manifesto_for_cultural_projects
>> .
>>
>> For convienience the text body is:
>>
>> *Manifesto*
>>
>> All cultural and heritage programmes with elements of public funding
>> should be committed to:
>>
>> *Preservation*
>>
>> Long term value of any project must be measured against credible plans
>> for eternal preservation. External hosting should be assessed for their
>> capability to commit to 100 year operational plans rather than 10 year
>> plans.
>> Artefacts subject to rapid deterioration (such as inscriptions subject to
>> natural erosion) should be considered for archive quality digital
>> preservation in addition to physical preservation or restoration.
>>
>> *Access*
>>
>> The public should have simple access to project outcomes.
>> The default for all projects should be free access for the public.
>> Virtual access should be a central component to access planning.
>>
>> *Engagement*
>>
>> Collaborative open knowledge projects, such as Wikipedia, should be a
>> central component to engagement planning.
>> Open knowledge must be easy to reuse and consume for collaboration to be
>> realistic. Digital assets should be licensed for free reuse and formatted
>> in the most commonly accepted open standards.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Fae
>> --
>> Ashley Van Haeften (Fae) fae at wikimedia.org.uk
>> Wikimedia UK Trustee http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Board
>> http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia:Email_disclaimer
>> Guide to email tags: http://j.mp/mfae
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Sam Leon
> Project Manager
> Open Knowledge Foundation
> http://okfn.org/
> Skype: samedleon
>
> _______________________________________________
> open-glam mailing list
> open-glam at lists.okfn.org
> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-glam
> Unsubscribe: http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/open-glam
>
>


-- 
Sebastiaan ter Burg
*Projectleider Culturele Samenwerking*

tel. 0648088615

*Postadres*:                        * Bezoekadres:*
Postbus 167                      Mariaplaats 3
3500 AD  Utrecht               Utrecht
________________________________
Leden mailing list
Leden at lists.wmnederland.nl
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-glam/attachments/20130422/699e9365/attachment-0001.html>