I've been thinking about how we communicate with audiences - about explaining what we're up to, about perpetual beta and iterative development versus traditional models of heavily reviewed authoritative publication... so I've been looking out for some good examples of information written for the public about cultural heritage technology experiments.
The headings below are straight from the top of my head - please add your own headings (and feel free to tidy them up if they get cumbersome) and your own examples.
What are we doing?
Rather than defining a set of services, we want to remain flexible and embrace the notion of “perpetual beta,” mirroring the collaborative, dynamic processes used in e-research and e-scholarship. To that end we are kicking off an e-Research task force which will employ several information-gathering strategies, ranging from brown bag discussions to a public planning wiki, and work together across disciplines and professional roles (e.g., scholar, librarian, IT professional) to identify themes and develop a plan of action.
Why are we doing this?
What's influencing this?
How can you get involved?
Why do we have rules?
A nice example from the National Maritime Museum's Astronomy Photographer of the Year Flickr group:
Why rules?
This group runs alongside the Royal Observatory Greenwich’s annual photography competition, Astronomy Photographer of the Year.
While your photos are posted to this group they may be displayed by the Royal Observatory Greenwich in relation to the Astronomy Photographer of the Year competition and exhibition, so we need to make sure that we have your permission to do so.
We’ll also provide details on how you can enter your photo into the Astronomy Photographer of the Year competition.
Why do we have copyright statements and/or limits?
Well, yes. Sometimes we don't have copyright ourselves to let other people use the images, etc.
[What else?]
Comments (0)
You don't have permission to comment on this page.