Pierluigi Feliciati – Kerkira 23 May 03 WP 5 WP 5 Guidelines of Quality for Public Cultural Web Applications and the managing of web contents Ministerial

Pierluigi Feliciati – Kerkira 23 May 03

WP 5WP 5 Guidelines of Quality

for Public Cultural Web

Applications

and the managing of web contents

Ministerial NEtwoRk for Valorising Activities in digitisation

U. Boccioni, Stati d’animo: quelli che vanno (1911) MOMA NYC


Outline

the MINERVA project• foreground• partners• policy scenario• structure• working packages• network enlargement• MINERVA website

the WP5 Quality Framework

the Quality Handbook recommendation

on long-term conservation of web contents


– June 2000: eEurope endorsement by EU States

– April 2001: meeting in Lund for co-ordination of digitisation programmes across Europe

Lund Principles to be developed through the

Lund Action PlanLund Action Plan

thethe MINERVA MINERVA projectproject

foreground


MINERVA isMINERVA is the instrument the instrument to to support the implementation support the implementation of theof the Lund Lund

Action PlanAction Plan

co-ordinating national programmesestablishing relationships with:• other European countries• international organisations• associations• networks• international and national projects,

with a special focus on the DigiCult DigiCult actionaction of IST


foreground


thethe MINERVA MINERVA projectproject Original

Partners

•Italy, coordinator (Ministero per i Beni e le Attività Culturali)

•Belgium (Ministère de la Communauté Française)

•Finland (University of Helsinki)

•France (Ministère de la culture et de la communication)

•Spain (Ministerio de Educación, Cultura y Deporte)

•Sweden (Riksarkivet)

•United Kingdom (The Council for Museums, Archives and Libraries)


thethe MINERVA MINERVA projectproject New

MembersHave already signed the membership agreement:

• Denmark• Greece• The Netherlands

Are going to sign:• Austria• Germany• Ireland


thethe MINERVA MINERVA projectproject Policy

ScenarioThe main aim of MINERVA is to support the European framework made up of NRG, Lund principles, Lund Action Plan and Presidencies of EU in the field of the cultural heritage digitisation.

The members agreed to give the highest visibility to the Lund principles in their countries, by setting-up national structures in charge of disseminating the results of the Minerva project.

All the member states agreed on the opportunity to invest on MINERVA project their own funding besides the budget provided by contract.


thethe MINERVA MINERVA projectproject how MINERVA

works 5 Working Groups at European level

Publications (guidelines, reports, case studies,

etc.)

National Policy Profiles concerning digitisation

National Representative Groups meetings

Workshops

Co-operation with other projects

Harmonising activities

Enlargement of the network


thethe MINERVA MINERVA projectproject the Working

GroupsTo provide political and technical frameworks for improving digitisation activities of cultural and scientific contentsTo contribute at the definition of a common European platform for the harmonisation of national initiatives

Benchmarking frameworkIdentification of Good practices and Competence centresInteroperability, Service Provision and IPRInventories, discovery of digitised content, multilingual issues Identification of user needs, contents and quality framework for common access points (WP5)


thethe MINERVA MINERVA projectproject BENCHMARKING

coordination: University of Helsinki (FL)To exchange comparable information between

Member States on programmes and policiesTo 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 improvementshort and long term strategies

• to report on the results achieved so far, at the next NRG meeting in Corfù (June 2003)

• 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.


thethe MINERVA MINERVA projectproject GOOD

PRACTICES coordination:

Riksarkivet (SE)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.

short and long term strategies

• first selection presented in Alicante (E), June 2002

• first MINERVA Handbook on Good Practices to be published during 2003, at the moment available in a draft version on the Minerva Website



INTEROPERABILITYcoordination: The Council for Museums, Archives and

Libraries (UK) within the general scope to contribute to the development of eventual European Guidelines for cultural digitisation

analyse, identify and evaluate activities on metadata, registries and schemes

promote discussion on standards, conformance testing centres, agreed terminologies, common metadata scheme, middleware specifications

examination of related issues, such as IPR


thethe MINERVA MINERVA projectproject INVENTORIES coordination: Ministère de la Culture et de la

Communication (FR)

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


thethe MINERVA MINERVA projectproject WEB QUALITY coordination: Ministère de la Communauté

Française (BE)

define quality criteria for the digitised content encourage the adoption of quality criteria for developing cultural and scientific web applicationssupporting the initiatives launched by the European Commission with the provision of national digital contentencourage training actions in cultural sites, to promote knowledge of multicultural issues


thethe MINERVA MINERVA projectproject Network

enlargementthe instruments:

Membership AgreementMembership Agreement to formalise the participation of Ministries to the Minerva Network;

Co-operation AgreementCo-operation Agreement to formalise the participation of interested organisations to the Minerva Users Group.


thethe MINERVA MINERVA projectproject MINERVA web

sitewww.minervaeurope.orgwww.minervaeurope.orgwhose goals are:

in the short term:• to promote the Lund principles as well as the activities and the results of the project• to promote the project’s partners• to be a “gate” to other linked initiatives

in the long term:• to be an essential instrument on web quality, digitisation, metadata, long-term preservation, accessibility

[email protected]@beniculturali.it


the WP5WP5 Quality Framework

milestones

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)



results achieved

• An effective European Working Group• A first Deliverable document on Quality

Synthesis of all the work of the meetings on quality, but also an account of the contributes delivered by the different experts of the national working groups on Quality

• A definitive Quality Framework, basis of the Quality Handbook

a 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 improve weak components• to validate and assess complete projects



1st goal: the Quality Handbook

References

• April 2001 - The Lund principles• December 2001 - The Brussels Quality Framework • November 2002 - The Greek WG5 questionnaire • January 2003 - The Italian WG5 draft document #1• February 2003 - The first Deliverable on quality of

WP5• March 2003 - Index of the « Quality Handbook for

Public Cultural Web Applications »



next stepsJune 2003• Presentation of the Handbook draft at the

Kerkira NRG meeting November 2003• Published in the form of a Handbook in

the Minerva Editorial LineNovember 2003 • Final approval and adoption at the Parma

NRG meeting Dissemination and e-learning programme


Quality Criteria for Public Cultural Web Applications

a new approach on qualitya new approach on quality

beyond the user-defined Webbeyond the user-defined Web


Quality Handbook



Quality Handbook table of contents

RATIONALE INTRODUCTION

1. Definitions, Principles and basic

Recommendations

2. Basic Quality Criteria for Web Applications

3. Specific Quality Criteria for Public

Cultural Web Applications ANNEXES

• Validation methods• International rules on public web


Chapter 1Definitions, 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 every Web project

Policies and strategies: Recommendations on Policies and strategies: Recommendations on to be followed during the Web projects


Quality Handbook contents


1.1. DefinitionsDefinitions1. 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




DefinitionsDefinitions1. Public Cultural Entity (PCEPCE)

An institution, organisation or project of public interest whose mission is to produce, preserve, safeguard, valorise and diffuse culture in any sector (archives, libraries, mobile and immobile heritage, archaeological, artistic, architectural, historical, demo-ethnological, anthropological).

2. 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 educational and scientific services.

3. 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.






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


PCWAPCWAGOALSGOALS

PPUBLIC UBLIC CCULTURALULTURAL

WWEBEBAAPPLICATIONPPLICATION

PCE PCE GOALSGOALS

USERSUSERSNEEDSNEEDS

SpecificQualityCriteria



2.2. PrinciplesPrinciplesa 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




3.3. Recommendations: Recommendations: ppolicies and olicies and strategiesstrategies

1. Networks and thematic access points2. PCWA quality 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. Long-term preservation of PCWA contents




Chapter 2Basic Quality Criteria for Web Applications

The quality criteria frameworkquality criteria framework is composed by two main groups : basic basic and specific specific criteria.

The basic frameworkbasic framework, a synthesis built according to the widely accepted criteria on web quality, is composed by two parts:

Accessibility Accessibility and UsabilityThe two macro-criteria should act together, one

depending from the other.






ACCESIBILITYACCESIBILITY issues

The conceptual and practical issues concerning AccessibilityAccessibility are presented and explained.

Accessibility must be a primary goal for a PCE: openining the access to cultural contents to the widest number of users, indipendently from their age, ability, techinical equipment, health.

2.

Basi

c Q

uali

ty C

rite

ria f

or

WA


USABILITYUSABILITY issuesContents criteriaConsistency, Currency, Accuracy, Content responsibility, Advertising

policy, Objectivity, Content organization evidence, Content membership evidence

Application evidence criteriaApplication mission evidence, Application responsibility, Maintenance strategy evidence, Technical strategy evidence

Navigation criteria Link evidence, Link soundness, Link coverage, Backtracking

soundness, Context evidence, Media control soundness, Media control evidence

Query/Search usabilityAppropriateness of query/search formsCompleteness of query/search resultsPossibility to bookmark/save query/search results

Presentation criteriaScannability, Similarity, Proximity, Consistency, Minimalism



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




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.




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 PCE category




1. Presenting PCE identity2. PCE activity transparency 3. PCWA mission transparency 4. Promotion of PCWA role in thematic

networks5. Presenting legal rules and standards6. Diffusing 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



T

he 1

2 P

CW

A G

OA

LS




Contents1. Completeness2. Comprehensiveness3. Conciseness4. Richness of information5. Multilinguism6. Appropriateness of language7. Authority / Responsibility8. Uniqueness

Content organisation9. Appropriateness of grouping 10. Appropriateness of nesting 11. Appropriateness of splitting

T

he 1

1 s

pecifi

c C

RIT

ER

IA



Quality Handbook contentsEach PCE category will be treated on a

special scheme:

• the PCE category and the web• the PCE category and its usual

Web Application goals• the PCE category and its users• the PCE category Web

application and the usual digitisation strategies

Th

e P

CE

cate

gori

es

an

d

the W

eb


the W

P5

WP

5 Q

uali

ty

Fra

mew

ork

P

CW

A g

oals

/qu

ali

ty c

rite

ria c

ross

ing

ta

ble


the W

P5

WP

5 Q

uali

ty

Fra

mew

ork

Q

uali

ty C

rite

ria

card

s


the long-term preservation Handbook Recommendation

• the UE Council Resolution of 25 June 2002 on digital preservation notes that: “memory institutions such as archives, libraries and museums have a central role to play” for a preservation policy of digital informations

• one of the main goals of Public Cultural Entities should be to contribute to turn upside down the anti-historical tendency of cyber-world

• the PCE should be in the front line in disseminating guidelines and best practices for long-term preservation of Web contents


the long-term preservation Quality Handbook Recommendation

in our Handbook about digital contents creation and management we want to

incorporate in the Web Qualityin the Web Quality notion notion

the necessity for Web developers of a

long-term preservation policy



A preservation policy regards organisational aspects and technological strategies, planned together.

The Quality Handbook points up with emphasis the importance of such issues in its

Principle # 4: “Adopt a suitable use of web applications”

Recommedations # 3-7: 3. Coordination between internal and external

information flow4. Communication channels coordination5. PCWA process management: project, development and

financial management (technical and organisational)6. IPR and privacy control for Application contents7.7. Long-term preservation Long-term preservation strategy strategy fforor ApplicationApplication

contentcontentss



1. A organisational preservation policyorganisational preservation policy for archiving Web Application materials should provide:• a primary role for the Producer/Creator among the

stakeholders• a strategy that preserve the hypertextual relationships

among materials: original or due to further modifications/interactions

• A strategy that considers the original distinction between public and private contents (i.e. Internet and Intranet applications)

• a strategy for valutation/selection• a strategy that preserve somehow the interaction

between application and users (logfiles, email, forum, blogs, newsgroups, etc)



2. A technical preservation policytechnical preservation policy for archiving for archiving Web Application materialsWeb Application materials should provide:• A strategy considering web applications as composed by

many media and formats, generated by many producers who create, update, rename, move and delete daily web contents, sometimes with the intervention of remote users

• A strategy that provides the creation, currency and conservation of proper finding/browsing/searching aids

• A strategy that forecastes and plans the consequences of hardware/software obsolescence


The Kerkira ERPANET Training Seminar conclusions will be the

basis for the Minerva Quality Handbook Recommendation on

preservation policy.

THANK YOU !

[email protected]

Documents

Pierluigi Feliciati – Kerkira 23 May 03 WP 5 WP 5 Guidelines of Quality for Public Cultural Web Applications and the managing of web contents Ministerial