[OpenGLAM] Open Gallery by Google

Fri Dec 13 08:16:53 UTC 2013

Dear all,

My first impression is that the Google Gallery addresses an important issue crucial to the OpenGLAM movement in quite an intelligent manner: It provides a presentation layer for GLAM content that:

a)     is independent from the Data/Content infrastructure

b)    has reasonable usability

c)     can easily be integrated in an existing online presence / corporate design

d)    is useful for enterprises of various organizational maturity

e)     is easily scalable and has a high potential to become viral

f)     starts with few functionalities that can be enhanced/elaborated over time

There may be a few drawbacks that need to be further looked into:

a)     How well does it integrate with the precepts of OpenGLAM? - Keep public domain works in the public domain; declare the copyright status of each work; provide metadata under a CC-0 license (or equivalent); provide high-resolution images for download, modification and re-distribution by third parties if the copyright status of the work allows for it; engage with your audiences. From the outside, the tool doesn't seem to be particularly supportive of these precepts; on the other hand, it may well be possible to develop it further to become so.

b)    How about data protection issues? - Here I would expect a trade-off between the integration with existing social media platforms (virality, ease of user engagement) and data protection.

c)     The code is not open source, and Google is not neutral with regard to leading social media platforms the tool may be hooked up with.

My first reflex would be: Embrace it in order to transform it; if this fails, re-engineer it to fit our objectives.

What I would particularly watch out for (this list may not be exhaustive):

-       Keep the data/content layer and the presentation layer separate; standardize the interface in order to prevent vertical integration of the two layers and the creation of a de facto quasi-monopoly by a single market player.

-       Push for functionalities both in the presentation layer and in the data/content layer that are supportive of the OpenGLAM precepts; make sure that OpenGLAM issues are properly addressed in the standardization process.

-       Do a better job communicating what "open" is about. (What does it mean when big players are engaging in semantic hijacking? How can we keep the upper hand in the public discourse?)

My 2 cents,

Beat

From: open-glam [mailto:open-glam-bounces at lists.okfn.org] On Behalf Of Cory Salveson
Sent: Freitag, 13. Dezember 2013 05:31
To: Jon Voss
Cc: open-glam at lists.okfn.org
Subject: Re: [OpenGLAM] Open Gallery by Google

While waiting for invites, I think we can learn something about Open Gallery's approach to openness by looking at its support page<https://support.google.com/opengallery/>, which discusses metadata management. We can also look at the Google Docs template<https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AjgMp2Fl90IgdE1NWmFhRmk0dmVLYlNZb2JRUU5va0E&usp=drive_web#gid=0> used for importing metadata.

It's pretty limited: itemid; title; description; creator; location:placename; date:start; date:end; filetype; and filespec. There's guidance on what to enter in each field, but no real validation except for the "filetype" field, which can be "image," "video," or "sequence," where "sequence" means a set of files.
So, there's no real mention of licensing approach, or licensing metadata, anywhere on the site that I can see. Presumably metadata on YouTube videos could license works for reuse, but there doesn't seem to be any real framework in the tool to define access to works generally or to underlying collection data (although if the latter is a Google Doc, I suppose it could be shared). It looks to be a pretty attractive gallery, then, but (to return to earlier thread in the conversation) still only "kinda" open, unless I'm missing something.

-Cory

On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 7:54 PM, Jon Voss <jon.voss at wearewhatwedo.org<mailto:jon.voss at wearewhatwedo.org>> wrote:
Yes, you do. I know several of us have requested them, but I haven't received anything after 2 days, and wondering if anyone else has.  It's hard for us to assess this at all if we haven't seen it.

On Dec 12, 2013, at 5:33 PM, Noreen Whysel wrote:

> I thought you had to request one.
>
>> True, gotta reward Open, not kinda Open, and use the same definition
>> consistently, which is the good thing about the OKFN def. maybe Heath
>> meant something more tongue-in-cheek, but I'm more of the mind of putting
>> the good examples out front with incentives and the like.
>>
>> Speaking of not really open to all, has anyone gotten an actual Open
>> Gallery invite yet??
>>
>> + + +
>> Sent from mobile device
>>
>> On Dec 11, 2013, at 7:54 PM, Rob Myers <rob at robmyers.org<mailto:rob at robmyers.org>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 11/12/13 05:31 AM, heath rezabek wrote:
>>>> This is why I think it could be a very useful role for the OKF (or
>>>> someone) to have some kind of 'Openness Award" they can grant to
>>>> organizations, or even some form of it that can call attention to
>>>> projects that seem open but don't meet the Open Definition.  Such an
>>>> effort would yield press awareness over time, and change as well.
>>>
>>> Rewarding not doing the right thing creates perverse incentives, though.
>>>
>>> Projects that seem open but aren't deserve (constructive, initially
>>> private) criticism and offers of help, not praise.
>>>
>>> - Rob.
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> open-glam mailing list
>>> open-glam at lists.okfn.org<mailto:open-glam at lists.okfn.org>
>>> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-glam
>>> Unsubscribe: http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/open-glam
>> _______________________________________________
>> open-glam mailing list
>> open-glam at lists.okfn.org<mailto:open-glam at lists.okfn.org>
>> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-glam
>> Unsubscribe: http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/open-glam
>>
>
>

_______________________________________________
open-glam mailing list
open-glam at lists.okfn.org<mailto:open-glam at lists.okfn.org>
http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-glam
Unsubscribe: http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/open-glam

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-glam/attachments/20131213/15cccbf1/attachment-0003.html>