• If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • Finally, you can manage your Google Docs, uploads, and email attachments (plus Dropbox and Slack files) in one convenient place. Claim a free account, and in less than 2 minutes, Dokkio (from the makers of PBworks) can automatically organize your content for you.


the outcome

Page history last edited by Owen Stephens 9 years, 3 months ago

The final output of this conversation will be a document, series of web pages or presentation. It is important that we produce something which we can all evangelise about and are prepared to sign up to publically. The output will be flexible and able to adapt, but should remain high-level and not become tied up with a discussion of the various technical approches. This is not a technical document, nor a standard. It is an outline strategic approach to the machine-connected museum.


Suggested outline:


  • a high-level statement defining the problem
  • case-studies illustrating the costs, risks and benefits of the machine approach
  • a strategic statement outlining 10 steps (?) that any museum should take when developing new (web) software
  • a closing recommendation


Comments (8)

sebchan said

at 11:17 am on May 14, 2008

I would strongly suggest that if you are targetting C-levels and directors then there should be NO mention of specific technologies. The document needs to stand on its own as a roadmap to a destination that everyone can agree is wrth reaching, and supports existing business models (or at least proposes new ones).

Mike said

at 11:20 am on May 14, 2008

Seb - I agree, although I think it'll be hard!

Do you think (see comments on "the problem" page) that - for instance - REST is "a technology"...?

Dan Zambonini said

at 11:54 am on May 14, 2008

It could be interesting (useful) to include some 'user centered' stuff in the final document: User Needs (past, current, future), User Benefits, User Stories (i.e. case studies/use cases), User Modes, Museum Benefits (from the 'users' within the museum's perspective). It should really 'bring home' what this is about, rather than making it a 'technology' story, make it a 'user' story.

Dan Zambonini said

at 11:56 am on May 14, 2008

In fact, it may even be interesting to title the 'final document' less about 'machine connectivity' and more about changing user modes and needs. Make it clear that it's not technology that's driving these recommendations, but an actual change in needs.

sebchan said

at 12:01 pm on May 14, 2008

ok so if we are talking needs then we need to actually check that the users are wanting this . . . . WHO are these users? what is their technographic profile?

Mia said

at 12:11 pm on May 14, 2008

Mike said

at 12:15 pm on May 14, 2008

I think in the first instance - and for the purposes of this bit of work - the users are internal museum staff who are commissioning, editing, building and otherwise exposing museum content for consumption online. I see the outcome evangelising the "API approach" which - as we know - makes sense from pretty much every direction.

Ultimately, of course, the users will be the people who go to the various websites, but even then it is unlikely that they'll know - or care about - the underthehoodness which is powering their experience. Longer term if museums can get themselves known as being providers of great quality content for consumption by "other developers", then great - although this may well be an aspiration too far...

Mia said

at 12:37 pm on May 14, 2008

I think we need tools for advocacy. We can always debate specific technologies between ourselves, but what really counts is: this is why it's important; here's how it will save work, time, money, duplicated effort; here's how it will benefit your users; here's where it helps you hit your targets and/or directly raise revenue.

And also: here's how it works in your tiny museum that has no online presence; in your small museum that has participated in a partnership project and has records online in some form but maybe you can't get at them; in your medium sized museum with reasonable but stretched IT resources; and here for the nationals.

With a bit of: here's what we learnt from earlier projects - NOF Digi, etc; here's how this relates to the bigger conversations that are happening at English Heritage; MLA; the Collections Trust.

You don't have permission to comment on this page.