Date post: | 27-Mar-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | morgan-manning |
View: | 215 times |
Download: | 0 times |
MINERVA ProjectMINERVA Project1. The Minerva framework2. Quality Handbook for Public Cultural Web
Applications: – Recommendations and Guidelines
Maria Teresa NataleMaria Teresa Natale Berlin, 5th August Berlin, 5th August 20032003
Ministerial NEtwoRk for Valorising Activising in digitisation
The MINERVA project is the operative section of a wider framework made up with the Lund Principles, the LUND
Action Plan and the National Representatives Group (NRG)
The MINERVA framework
Lund Meeting – 4th April 2001 Representatives and experts
from the Member States gathered in order to identify
ways in which “a coordination mechanism for digitisation
programmes across the Member States” could be put in place
to stimulate European content on global networks.
Lund Principles: the major outcome of this
meeting They state that the Member States could make progress on the eEurope objective if they:
• established an ongoing forum for coordination of policies for digitisation;
• supported the developing of a European view on policies and programmes;
• exchanged and promoted good practice, guidelines and consistency of practice and skills development;
• worked in a collaborative manner to make visible and accessible the digitised cultural and scientific heritage of Europe.
http://www.cordis.lu/ist/ka3/
digicult/lund_principles.htm
Lund Action Plan
The Action Plan describes a first set of actions to be launched, and assigns responsibilities for them to Member States or to the European Commission.
The Lund Action Plan takes as its reference the Lund Principles, identifying four main areas where specific actions are needed:
Lund Action Plan
Area 1: Improving policies and programmes through
co-operation and benchmarking
Area 2: Discovery of digitised resources
Area 3: Promotion of good practiceArea 4: Content framework
National Representatives Group
The NRG is made up of officially nominated experts from each Member State.
It was set up to coordinate digitisation policies and programmes and to facilitate the adoption and implementation of the Lund Action Plan.
National Representatives GroupIt’s stated mission is to monitor
progress regarding the objectives encapsulated in the Lund Principles.
The NRG meets every 6 months to share national experiences and create a common platform for cooperation and coordination of national activities across the European Union, as well as for their follow up at national level.
What is MINERVA
Minerva is the spreading arm of the National Representatives Group.
It is financed by the European Commission in the ambit of the IST Programme.
It is a network of Member States’ ministries.
Original Partners• Italy, coordinator (Ministero per i Beni e le
Attività Culturali)• Belgium (Ministère de la Communauté
française)• Finland (University of Helsinky)• France (Ministère de la Culture et de la
Communication)• Spain (Ministerio de Educaciòn, Cultura y
Deporte)• Sweden (Riksarkivet)• United Kingdom (The Council for Museums,
Archives and Libraries)
New Members• Denmark• Greece• The Netherlands• Austria• Germany• Ireland• Portugal
MINERVA missionThe network has been created:The network has been created: to discuss, correlate and harmonise
activities carried out in digitisation of cultural and scientific content;
to create agreed European common recommendations and guidelines about:
– digitisation, – metadata, – long-term accessibility,– preservation.
ActivitiesMINERVA has demonstrated to have
contributed to the creation of a broad consensus on the European framework derived from the e-Europe initiative
In many countries, under the aegis of MINERVA, many new national programmes of digitisation of cultural heritage started up
MINERVA has contributed to creating a process of institutional collaboration among the various presidencies of the European Union
The “rolling agenda”
In order to guarantee the continuity of the initiatives undertaken, the past, present and future presidencies of the EU commonly define the so called “rolling agenda”.
How Minerva works• 5 Working Groups at European level• Publications (guidelines, reports,
etc.)• National Policy Profiles on
digitisation• Workshops• Co-operation with other projects• Harmonising activities• Enlargement of the network• Training courses
The Working Groups
• They provide political and technical framework for improving digitisation activities and scientific contents
• They contribute at the definition of a common European platfoprm for the harmonisation of national initiatives
Working Group: BenchmarkingAims
To exchange comparable information between Member States on programmes and policies;
To give visibility to national activities in order to share similar experiences and skills;
To promote the adoption of a benchmarking framework as a key tool for co-ordinating and harmonising national activities as well as to develop measures to show progress and improvement.
BenchmarkingShort term strategy:•Elaboration of a data model to collect information (phase closing on August 2003; report on the results achieved so far, NRG meeting in Corfu (June 2003)
Long term strategy:
•Complete definition of the data base;
•to set-up methodology, shared data format and tool, for collecting data on a continuous base;
•to update constantly qualitative and quantitative information and to create a common database.
Working Group: Inventories, discovery
of digitised content, multilingual issues
Aims:
To share experiences, to discuss and to facilitate implementation of common actions concerning:
inventories of past, on-going and planned digitisation projects based on national observatories;
technical infrastructure for coordinated discovery of European digitised cultural and scientific content, including a common set of metadata for description;
multilingual issues;
Analysis of the French model of descriptive standards and its adaptability to the Italian requirements.
Working Group: Interoperability,
Service Provision and IPR Aims
• To analyse, identify and evaluate activities on metadata, registries and schemes;
• To discuss on standards, conformance testing centres, agreed terminologies, common metadata schema, middleware specifications;
• To examine of related legal issues, such as IPR and copyright.
Working Group: User needs, contents and quality
frameworkAims•To define quality criteria for the
digitised content (MINERVA Handbook expected by end of 2003);
•To encourage quality plan in cultural and scientific web sites;
•To support the initiatives launched by the European Commission with the provision of national digital content;
•To encourage training actions in cultural sites, to promote knowledge of multicultural issues.
Working Group: Good practicesAims
• To select and to promote good practice examples from Member State programmes and projects in order to exchange experiences, skills and to collect consensus from different communities of users.
• First selection presented in Alicante, June 2002
• First MINERVA Handbook on Good Practices to be published during the Italian Presidency.
Network enlargement
THE INSTRUMENTS• Membership agreementTo formalise the participation of
Ministries in the Minerva network• Co-operation agreementTo formalise the participation of
interested organisation in the Minerva Users Group
Minerva Web sitewww.minervaeurope.org
• To promote the Lund Principles, the acitivities and the results of the project
• To promote the project’s partners• To be a “gate” to other linked initiatives• To be an essential instrument on Web
quality, digitisation, metadata, long-term preservation, accessibility
TrainingA programme of training courses that uses opendistance learning methodologies has been set
up todiffuse the results of the project. Action lines:1. digitisation: process, cataloguing and
management, including metadata for the preservation;
2. legal aspects: IPR/copyright and data protection;
3. quality: criteria for design and development of cultural Web sites;
4. management of projects and services.
Publications
Minerva publishes handbooks and guidelines on digitisation, edited by its working groups, and an annual progress report of the NRG.
Already published• Progress report of the National
Representatives Group 2002
PublicationsNext publications• Good practice handbook with the
collection of the existing guidelines on digitisation
• Handbook for quality in public cultural applications: criteria, guidelines and basic recommendations
• Collection of the existing laws on IPR• II Progress report of the National
Representatives Group 2003
New toolsThe Newsletter:The subscription to the English
newsletter is now possible through the MINERVA web site: a constant updating about the MINERVA news.
The MINERVA mailing list:Soon available, the MINERVA mailing list
will distribute information to users interested in the digitisation issues
Italian Presidency EventsMinerva participation
• Florence, 16th-17th October: International Conference on Long Term Preservation of Digital Memories (organised by the MiBAC - DG for Libraries, in cooperation with MINERVA)
• Naples, 23rd-24th October: seminar Territorial information systems for the conservation, preservation and management of Cultural Heritage (organised by the MiBAC - DG for Archaeology, in cooperation with MINERVA)
Italian Presidency Events Minerva organization
• Rome, 29th October: workshop Digitisation: how to do in practice (in cooperation with AIB)
• Parma, 19th November: NRG meeting
• Parma, 20th-21st November: International Conference Quality for Cultural Web Sites (organised with MiBAC, City of Parma, Emilia-Romagna Region, Parma local authorities, University of Parma)
The Parma Conference Quality in cultural Web sites -
Online Cultural Heritage for Research, Education and Cultural Tourism Communities
The Parma Conference (20-21 November)Quality in cultural Web sites - Online Cultural Heritage
for Research, Education and Cultural Tourism Communities
The conference intends to debate the main themes connected to the aspects of the online accessibility of cultural heritage to facilitate its access to a wider public all over the world, and to promote the development and valorisation of cultural tourism services.
• I session: Accessibility and communication: principles - best practices
• II session: Guidelines on quality for cultural Web sites• III session: IPR, copyright and data protection
“Web quality for cultural Web sites” - Poster session
4 themes1. Content quality for
cultural Web Site 2. Accessibility 3. IPR issues 4. Communication and
language
The WP5 Quality Framework
March 2002 Beginning of the Minerva project
May 2002 Set up of the Minerva Quality Working Group
February 2003 First Deliverable on quality
March 2003Index of the «Quality Handbook for Public Cultural Web Applications – Recommendations and Guidelines »
June 2003Draft version of the « Quality Handbook » (Corfu)
November 2003Definitive version of the « Quality Handbook » (Parma)
2004Dissemination
WP5 – Results achieved
• A definitive Quality Framework, basis of
the Quality Handbooka set of criteria to be used at the difference stages of development of a cultural web site, i.e.:
• for the development of new cultural web sites
• to measure the quality of a project under development, in order to restyle weak components
• to validate and assess complete projects
WP5 – Quality handbook
Quality Criteria for Public Cultural Web
Applications
a new approacha new approach
beyond the user-defined beyond the user-defined
WebWeb
WP5 – Quality handbook contents
RATIONALE INTRODUCTION1. Definitions, Principles and basic
Recommendations2. General Quality Criteria for Web
Applications3. Specific Quality Criteria for Public Cultural
Web Applications ANNEXES
• Validation methods Framework• International rules on public web Repertory• Italian document on IPR and privacy issues
WP5 – Quality handbook contentsChapter 1
Definitions, principles and recommendations
The complex issues coming from the crossing of the cultural world with the Web revolution needs:
Synthetic and efficient definitionsdefinitions : classes, notions and subjectsGeneral prprinciplesinciples, acting like basic premises in the Web project
Recommendations on policies and Recommendations on policies and
strategies strategies to be followed during the Web project phase
WP5 – Quality handbook contents1.1. DefinitionsDefinitions
1. Public Cultural Entity (PCEPCE)• PCE identity• PCE categories• PCE goals
2. Public Cultural Web Application (PCWAPCWA)• PCWA goals
3. PCWA Users• PCWA Users’ needs• PCWA Users’ routes
WP5 – Quality handbook definitions1. Public Cultural Web Application
(PCWAPCWA)Every Web application whose services and contents concern
cultural heritage in all its sectors, and which provides cultural information and promotion and/or offers didactic and scientific services.
2. PCWA UsersEveryone, professional or non professional, who uses in a
systematic, casual, incidental or finalised way a PCWA, satisfying different needs depending on his cultural profile, his aspiration to a personal growth or his incidental curiosity.
3. Public Cultural Entity (PCEPCE)An institution, organisation or project of public interest whose
mission is to produce, conserve, safeguard, valorise and diffuse culture in any sector (archives, libraries, mobile and immobile heritage, archaeological, artistic, architectural, historical, demo-ethnological, anthropological).
WP5 – Quality handbook contents Categories
1. Archives
2. Libraries
3. Monuments / Sites / Parks
/Reserves
4. Museums
5. Conservation departments
6. Research/training institutes
7. Exhibitions
8. Temporary projects
T
he 8
PC
E C
AT
EG
OR
IES
2.2. PrinciplesPrinciplesa Public cultural entity (PCE) should provide to:
1. Promote the widest diffusion of culture2. Share the whole community of cultural
entities3. Use innovative channel of
communication’s effectiveness4. Adopt a suitable use of web applications5. Conceive quality as a process with the
agreement between PCE and Users’ goals
the WP5WP5 Quality Framework
Quality Handbook contents
3.3. Recommendations: Recommendations: ppolicies and olicies and strategiesstrategies
1. Networks and thematic access points2. PCWA domain and validation 3. PCE coordination between internal and
external information flow4. PCE communication channels coordination5. PCWA process management: project,
development and financial management 6. IPR and privacy control for PCWA contents7.7. Long-term preservationLong-term preservation of PCWA of PCWA contentscontents
the WP5WP5 Quality Framework
Quality Handbook contents
Chapter 2Basic Quality Criteria for Web Applications
The quality criteria framework is composed by two main groups : basic basic and specific specific criteria.
Chapter 2 is dedicated to the basic framework, a synthesis built according to the widely accepted criteria on web quality.
Each criterium will be explained with definition, commentary and examples.
the WP5WP5 Quality Framework
Quality Handbook contents
Content criteriaConsistency, Currency, Accuracy, Content responsibility, Advertising
policy, Objectivity, Content organization evidence, Content membership evidence
Navigation criteria Link evidence, Link soundness, Link coverage, Backtracking
soundness, Context evidence, Media control soundness, Media control evidence
Presentation criteriaScannability, Similarity, Proximity, Consistency, Minimalism
Application evidence (technical) criteriaApplication mission evidence, Application responsibility, Maintenance
strategy evidence, Technical strategy evidence
Accessibility criteria(from WAI Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0 - W3C Recommendation
-1999)
the WP5WP5 Quality Framework
Quality Handbook contents
2.
Basi
c Q
uali
ty C
rite
ria f
or
WA
Chapter 3 - Specific Quality Criteria for Public Cultural Web Applications (PCWA)
Contents1. Premises2. PCWA goals / quality criteria crossing table3. PCWA goals definitions4. PCE categories and the Web5. PCWA goals / quality criteria cards
the WP5WP5 Quality Framework
Quality Handbook contents
Chapter 3
Specific Quality Criteria for Public Cultural Web Applications (PCWA)
• Besides the respect of basic quality criteria, the specificity of Public Cultural Web Applications require specific quality criteria.
• Those criteria may change according to each PCWA goals.
• Each of the 12 PCWA goals must descend from the agreement between PCE goals and users needs.
the WP5WP5 Quality Framework
Quality Handbook contents
Chapter 3
Specific Quality Criteria for Public Cultural Web Applications (PCWA)
• For each of the 12 PCWA goals are defined and commented the proper quality criteria, both for PCWA content and for its technical characteristics, intended as valid for all PCE categories.
• When necessary, the criteria will be better clarified according to the specificity of each of the PCE categories
the WP5WP5 Quality Framework
Quality Handbook contents
1. Presenting PCE identity2. PCE activity transparency 3. PCWA mission transparency 4. Promotion of PCWA role in thematic
networks5. Presenting legal rules and standards6. Spreading cultural contents 7. Promoting cultural tourism8. Educational services9. Scientific research services 10. Services for culture-related professional11. Reservation and e-commerce services12. Promotion of thematic communities
the WP5WP5 Quality Framework
Quality Handbook contents
T
he 1
2 P
CW
A G
OA
LS
the WP5WP5 Quality Framework
Quality Handbook contents
Contents1. Completeness2. Comprehensiveness3. Conciseness4. Richness of information5. Multilinguism6. Authority / Responsibility7. Uniqueness
Content organisation8. Appropriateness of grouping 9. Appropriateness of nesting 10. Appropriateness of splitting
Query/Search usability11. Appropriateness of query/search forms12. Completeness of query/search results13. Possibility to bookmark/save query/search results
T
he 1
3 s
pecifi
c C
RIT
ER
IA
• Collection of comments and observations before 1st September so as to complete the handbook before the meeting in Brussels on 24th September. It is common knowledge that the first stable version will be presented at the Conference of Parma on 20th-21st November.
• The draft showed an advanced level of processed text; all the points in the Index have been considered and further developed, even though some parts are still in the phase of deeper study and completion.
• Please send all contributions and comments to the editorial board ([email protected])
www.minervaeurope.org/publications/qualitycriteria1_0.htm
the WP5WP5 Quality Framework
Quality Handbook work programme
Thanks for your attentionfrom