Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

  1. Alessandra Luciano (Luxembourg), Mon 4 Nov

  2. Tonny Skovgård Jensen (Denmark), Thu 7 Nov

  3. Georgia Angelaki and Elena Lagoudi (Greece), Fri 8 Nov

  4. Katarzyna Waletko and Marta Ćwiek (Poland), Fri 15 Nov

Links:

...

  • Their institutions need to feel like the process is easy - having to reconfigure their whole data to fit the data space is a barrier; they want to be ae to use whatever they’re already doing; more of a drag and rop experience would be ideal, and they’d be far more likely to share more; 5-10 year long progression curve so they can see their efforts would be great; but the non-ease of it is the major challenge - the aggregation process is not the smoothest for them, and that’s where most of the barriers lie; otherwise they’re happy to comply;

  • They work through domain aggregators; interested in finding other ways of aggregating; they dont like how it has to be ‘dumbed down’ to fit into europeana

  • She needs to explain what the data space is to both her cabinet and her data providers; how do we aggregate, and what is that process like, is there a new way we can do it and can they be a pilot for it? Because they are small and they are willing

  • Being discoverable on Europeana is not interesting enough on it’s own for CHIs,

    • they have their own platforms and networks, that are keeping them busy;

    • more interested in being part of the community around testing tools and technologies like IIIF projects where they codevelop or codesign new data schemes that would ofc work better for them;

    • levelling up competencies is really what it’s about ;

    • the activities are alway an excuse for the bottom line which is building competencies and future-proofing - that’s the philosophy is being structured 

Tonny Skovgård Jensen (Denmark), Thu 7 Nov

Georgia Angelaki and Elena Lagoudi (Greece), Fri 8 Nov

Katarzyna Waletko and Marta Ćwiek (Poland), Fri 15 Nov