IST-Data Services Blog

Project Bamboo published a proposed scope of work for its initial year of implementation work, begining in 2010. This work will support the broader Bamboo Program, for which a Planning Phase has been running since April 2008 (cf. http://projectbamboo.org).

The document describing this proposed scope of work is published on the Project Bamboo wiki at this URL:

https://wiki.projectbamboo.org/x/SYUHAQ

The document describes two fully functional “Product Deliverables”:

1. Enabling Technologies to Support Communities of Practice will allow scholars in the arts, humanities, and interpretive social sciences to describe their work, and to collaborate with technologists in generalizing workflows applicable across individual, disciplinary, and institutional practice; and then to collaborate in discussing, specifying, rating, and reviewing technology designed to support that practice.

2. Humanities Corpora and Curation Workspace, expected to be built on Collection Space services, is intended to support management, consideration, and dissemination of small collections, with particular emphasis on collections owned or held by individual scholars in the arts, humanities, and interpretive social sciences.

In addition, the proposal describes sets of services that will support and enhance these “products” and — beyond Project Bamboo’s first build iteration — will support additional tools, application packages, and service compositions that support humanist inquiry. Last, the proposal begins to describe a service delivery platform (the infrastructural software technology on which services will run) for all the above, and the principles and processes that will guide its development and evolution.

The proposed scope has been released to the Project Bamboo community for review and feedback, and will serve as the basis of a funding proposal to the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, to be submitted in January 2010.

On October 6, the CollectionSpace project team announced the 0.2 release of the community source collection management system.  As the news item states, this release:

allows users to login to the system, create a new intake record, and auto-fill intake and object identification numbers. Information groups within data entry screens can be collapsed and expanded to maximize screen efficiency (use the plus/minus signs to the left of the information group name; e.g. object identification information). Updates to the object, create new main page, and find/edit main page are also incorporated into this release.

Equally important, this release demonstrates that the project team is gaining momentum towards the version 1 release in June 2010.  The next release is intended to continue accelerating the pace of development and will include:

an expansion of the ID service to include a choice of sequential identification numbers; the first version of the vocabulary service, which will provide access to controlled lists; and support for acquisition.

Also tantalizing, the UCB services team is working on some of the important schema customization and multi-tenancy capabilities for the system.

The CollectionSpace project team has released version 0.1 of its open-source collection management system for museums. This Hello World release focuses on tying the technology layers together around the function of basic object entry. Those interested in collections are encouraged to experiment with the Hello World release and provide feedback to the project team. CollectionSpace is funded by the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation.  Read the iNews article for more information:

http://inews.berkeley.edu/articles/Aug2009/CollectionSpace

Also worth noting, Carl Goodman and Megan Forbes (of Museum of the Moving Image) recently visited the Getty Research Institute (Los Angeles) and the the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art.  Their presentations are hosted on the CollectionSpace wiki and provide a great overview of where CollectionSpace is right now.  Here’s a link to the Getty presentation:

http://wiki.collectionspace.org/display/collectionspace/Getty+Presentation+July+2009

It’s great to see this first version which focuses on technical integration.  IST will work closely with the CollectionSpace project team, as well as with campus museums, to ensure that this solution will be one that helps us manage, study, and share the world-class collections for which UC Berkeley is responsible.

Here’s what Michael Black, research and IT director of the Hearst Museum, said about it:

Hi everyone,

This is just a quick announcement, as fuller information should be upcoming in a campus press release.

Delphi 1.2 (the updated version of the Museum’s collections exploration and discovery tool) is now live and online.

In addition to the features released in version 1.1 two weeks ago — the ability to share sets with other people (whether or not they’re Delphi users), greatly improved ontologies (’concept trees’) for automatic object classification, vastly enlarged object data (thanks to the efforts of dedicated volunteers doing data entry on more than 140,000 objects), and the ability to view scans of catalog cards for the objects you find — Delphi 1.2 presents a couple of new user-oriented features.

Delphi 1.2 now fully supports user tagging of objects, including being able to search on either your own tags or across all tags submitted by the entire user community.  Starting with this release, the blue “tongue” will change the content it displays according to the experience level of the user.  For new users, a basic introductory text is displayed, while for more experienced users (here defined as those who have at least played around with the sets and/or tagging features), the displayed text is more of a “what’s new in Delphi” news item.

I invite you to try it out, to share it with family, friends, colleagues, etc.

http://pahma.berkeley.edu/delphi
Michael

The topic of Big Data and the associated trends for research are part of our future here at DS. The recent issue of Nature looks at issues and trends around the topic, and while uneven, has some good material in it that folks should check out. Here’s my blow by blow on the sections:

The opening editorial calls for push to make annotating data be a major component of research and of grants. Sound familiar? Let’s hope funders listen.

The section on the next Google trots out a lot of familiar and frankly pretty dull options. Skip it.

Big data: Data wrangling poses important question about data collection. We might have the sense is that there is so much data, it is just a matter of managing it. However, David Goldston notes that there are also huge holes in the dataverse, and these are a result of political policy. Further, if a political entity controls the data, politics can (and will) shape and filter the data in fair-reaching ways.

Cory Doctorow’s Gee whiz piece is irritating (unless you’re into technoporn), and is easy to skip.

A piece on wikiomics is an excellent description of how community can make a difference, and the social dynamics of a collaboratory.

Cliff Lynch has a good piece on what data production projects must do to rationalize their data management, and what services must be provided by groups like IST/DS, to support these projects.

Frankel & Reid present an interesting discussion of mining and visualization, and include a compelling, cautionary note:

“The ingrained habits of highly trained scientists make them rarely as adventurous as these young minds. We think we are on the path to insight when shading reveals contours in 3D renderings, or when bursts of red appear on heat maps, for example. But the algorithms used to produce the graphics may create illusions or embed assumptions. The human visual system creates in the brain an apparent understanding of what a picture represents, not necessarily a picture of the underlying science. Unless we know all the steps from hypothesis to understanding — by conversing with theorists, experimentalists, instrument and software developers, visualization scientists, graphic artists and cognitive psychologists — we cannot be sure whether a display is accurate or misleading.”

The closing essay is human interest and could be skipped in the interest of time. However, it is short, and like the best human interest stories, is surprising and inspiring.