User Participation in Archival Knowledge Structures: Archival Description as Domain and Testing Ground

References

Anderson, S. R., and R. B. Allen. 2009. “Envisioning the Archival Commons.” American Archivist 72 (1): 383–400.10.17723/aarc.72.2.g54085061q586416Suche in Google Scholar

Bak, G., D. Allard, and S. Ferris. 2019. “Knowledge Organization as Knowledge Creation: Surfacing Community Participation in Archival Arrangement and Description.” Knowledge Organization 46 (7): 502–21.10.5771/0943-7444-2019-7-502Suche in Google Scholar

Barros, T. H. B., and R. T. B. de Sousa. 2019. “Archival Science and Knowledge Organization: Mapping Methodological Relationships.” Knowledge Organization 46 (7): 493–501.10.5771/0943-7444-2019-7-493Suche in Google Scholar

BenoitIIIE. 2017. “#MPLP Part 1: Comparing Domain Expert and Novice Social Tags in a Minimally Processed Digital Archives.” American Archivist 80 (2): 407–38.10.17723/0360-9081-80.2.407Suche in Google Scholar

BenoitIIIE. 2018. “#MPLP Part 2: Replacing Item-Level Metadata with User-Generated Social Tags.” American Archivist 81 (1): 38–64.10.17723/0360-9081-81.1.38Suche in Google Scholar

Caswell, M., and M. Cifor. 2016. “From Human Rights to Feminist Ethics: Radical Empathy in the Archives.” Archivaria 81 (1): 23–43.Suche in Google Scholar

Chi, Ed H. 2008. “The Social Web: Research and Opportunities.” Computer: 88–91. https://www.computer.org (accessed April 17, 2020).10.1109/MC.2008.401Suche in Google Scholar

Choi, Y. 2017. “The Nature of Tags in a Knowledge Organization System of Primary Visual Resources.” Journal of Library Metadata 17 (1): 37–53. https://doi.org/10.1080/19386389.2017.1314131.Suche in Google Scholar

Choi, Y., and S. Y. Syn. 2016. “Characteristics of Tagging Behavior in Digitized Humanities Online Collections.” Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 67 (5): 1089–1104. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23472.Suche in Google Scholar

Christen, K. 2011. “Opening Archives: Respectful Repatriation.” American Archivist 74 (2):183–210.10.17723/aarc.74.1.4233nv6nv6428521Suche in Google Scholar

Collier, R. 2010. “A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to Interactivity: A Case Study of ‘Enhancing’ Finding Aids.” The Journal of the Society of North Carolina Archivist 8 (1): 29–42.Suche in Google Scholar

Da Silva, A. P., J. A. C. Guimarães, and N. B. Tognoli. 2015. “Ethical Values in Archival Arrangement and Description: An Analysis of Professional Codes of Ethics.” Knowledge Organization 42 (5): 346–52.10.5771/0943-7444-2015-5-346Suche in Google Scholar

Ducey, Marjie. 2020. “UNO Archivists Want Your Help Documenting the Coronavirus Pandemic for Posterity.” Omaha World-Herald, March 29, 2020. https://www.omaha.com/lifestyles/uno-archivists-want-your-help-documenting-the-coronavirus-pandemic-for/article_30485825-a93e-5536-b317-866454b1b804.html.Suche in Google Scholar

Duff, W. M., and J. Haskell. 2015. “New Uses for Old Records: A Rhizomatic Approach to Archival Access.” American Archivist 78 (1): 38–58.10.17723/0360-9081.78.1.38Suche in Google Scholar

Farley, L. 2014. “The Participatory Finding Aid and the Archivist: How User Annotations are Changing Everyone’s Role.” Archival Issues 35 (2): 79–98.Suche in Google Scholar

Fintland, I. 2016. “Archival Descriptions Through the Looking Glass: Paratexts in Wonderland.” American Archivist 79 (1): 137–60.10.17723/0360-9081.79.1.137Suche in Google Scholar

Gilliland, A. J. 2012. “Contemplating Co-creator Rights in Archival Description.” Knowledge Organization 39 (5): 340–46.10.5771/0943-7444-2012-5-340Suche in Google Scholar

Gorzalski, M. 2013. “Examining User-Created Description in the Archival Profession.” Journal of Archival Organization 11: 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/15332748.2013.866858.Suche in Google Scholar

Greene, M. A. 2010. “MPLP: It’s Not Just for Processing Anymore.” American Archivist 73 (1): 175–203.10.17723/aarc.73.1.m577353w31675348Suche in Google Scholar

Greene, M. A., and D. Meissner. 2005. “More Product, Less Process: Revamping Traditional Archival Processing.” American Archivist 68 (2): 208–63.10.17723/aarc.68.2.c741823776k65863Suche in Google Scholar

Guimarães, J. A. C., and N. B. Tognoli. 2015. “Provenance as a Domain Analysis Approach in Archival Knowledge Organization.” Knowledge Organization 42 (8): 562–69.10.5771/0943-7444-2015-8-562Suche in Google Scholar

Harling, A. 2014. “MPLP as Intentional, Not Necessarily Minimal, Processing: The Rudolf W. Becking Collections at Humboldt State University.” American Archivist 77 (2): 489–98.10.17723/aarc.77.2.563004228307n2m3Suche in Google Scholar

Hester, J. L. 2020. “How to Help Librarians and Archivists from Your Living Room.” Atlas Obscura, March 23, 2020. https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/archives-to-browse-from-home.Suche in Google Scholar

Hjørland, B. 2013. “User-Based and Cognitive Approaches to Knowledge Organization: A Theoretical Analysis of the Research Literature.” Knowledge Organization 40 (1): 11–27.10.5771/0943-7444-2013-1-11Suche in Google Scholar

Hjørland, B. 2017. “Domain Analysis.” Knowledge Organization 44 (6): 436–64.10.5771/0943-7444-2017-6-436Suche in Google Scholar

Krause, M. G., and E. Yakel. 2007. “Interaction in Virtual Archives: The Polar Bear Expedition Digital Collection Next Generation Finding Aid.” American Archivist 70 (2): 282–314.10.17723/aarc.70.2.lpq61247881t10kvSuche in Google Scholar

Lemieux, V. 2015. “Visual Analytics, Cognition and Archival Arrangement and Description: Studying Archivists’ Cognitive Tasks to Leverage Visual Thinking for a Sustainable Archival Future.” Archival Science 15: 25–49. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10502-013-9212-y.Suche in Google Scholar

Liew, C. L. 2016. “Social Metadata and Public-Contributed Contents In Memory Institutions: ‘Crowd Voice’ Versus ‘Authenticated Heritage’?” Preservation, Digital Technology & Culture 45 (3): 122–33.10.1515/pdtc-2016-0017Suche in Google Scholar

Light, M., and T. Hyry. 2002. “Colophons and Annotations: New Directions for the Finding Aid.” American Archivist 65 (2): 216–30.10.17723/aarc.65.2.l3h27j5x8716586qSuche in Google Scholar

Lougheed, B., R. Moran, and C. Callison. 2015. “Reconciliation Through Description: Using Metadata to Realize the Vision of the National Research Centre for Truth and Reconciliation.” Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 53 (5–6): 596–614. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639374.2015.1008718.Suche in Google Scholar

MacNeil, H. 1995. “Metadata Strategies and Archival Description: Comparing Apples to Oranges.” Archivaria 39: 22–32.Suche in Google Scholar

MacNeil, H., and J. Douglas. 2015. “Generic Evolution and the Online Archival Catalogue.” Archives & Records 36 (2): 107–27. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/23257962.2015.1070094.10.1080/23257962.2015.1070094Suche in Google Scholar

Matusiak, K. K. 2006. “Towards User-Centered Indexing in Digital Image Collections.” OCLC Systems & Services: International Digital Library Perspectives 22 (4): 283–98. https://doi.org/10.1108/10650750610706998.Suche in Google Scholar

Mayer, P. H. 2013. “Like a Box of Chocolates: A Case Study of User-Contributed Content at Footnote.” American Archivist 76 (1): 19–46.10.17723/aarc.76.1.up5u15p2k1826686Suche in Google Scholar

McQueen, K. 2015. “Ethical Issues of Knowledge Organization in Designing a Metadata Schema for the Leo Kottke Archives.” Knowledge Organization 42 (5): 332–38.10.5771/0943-7444-2015-5-332Suche in Google Scholar

Meissner, D., and M. A. Greene. 2010. “More Application While Less Appreciation: The Adopters and the Antagonists of MPLP.” Journal of Archival Documentation 8 (3–4): 174–226.10.1080/15332748.2010.554069Suche in Google Scholar

Mossberger, K., C. J. Tolbert, and R. S. McNeal. 2008. Digital Citizenship: The Internet, Society, and Participation. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/7428.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar

Murphy, M. O., L. Peimer, G. Duplisea, and J. Fritz. 2015. “Failure Is an Option: The Experimental Archives Project Puts Archival Innovation to the Test.” American Archivist 78 (2): 434–51.10.17723/0360-9081.78.2.434Suche in Google Scholar

Nesmith, T. 2015. “Toward the Archival Stage in the History of Knowledge.” Archivaria 80 (2): 119–45.Suche in Google Scholar

Pearce-Moses, R. 2016. A Glossary of Archival and Records Terminology. Chicago: Society of American Archivists.Suche in Google Scholar

Phillips, J. 2015. “A defense of preservation in the age of MPLP.” American Archivist 78 (2): 470–87.10.17723/0360-9081.78.2.470Suche in Google Scholar

Pitti, D. V. 1999. “Encoded Archival Description: An Introduction and Overview.” D-Lib Magazine 5 (11). http://www.dlib.org/dlib/november99/11pitti.html (accessed June 15, 2020).10.1045/november99-pittiSuche in Google Scholar

Preece, J., and D. Maloney-Krichmar. 2005. “Online Communities: Design, Theory, and Practice.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 10 (4). https://academic.oup.com/jcmc/article/10/4/JCMC10410/4614449 (accessed June 15, 2020).10.1111/j.1083-6101.2005.tb00264.xSuche in Google Scholar

Prom, C. J. 2011. “Using Web Analytics to Improve Online Access to Archival Resources.” American Archivist 74 (1): 158–84.10.17723/aarc.74.1.h56018515230417vSuche in Google Scholar

Rafferty, P. 2018. “Tagging.” Knowledge Organization 45 (6): 500–16.10.5771/0943-7444-2018-6-500Suche in Google Scholar

Riley, J., and K. Shepherd. 2009. “A Brave New World: Archivists and Shareable Descriptive Metadata.” American Archivist 72 (1): 91–112.10.17723/aarc.72.1.kl70j01223654874Suche in Google Scholar

Samouelian, M. 2009. “Embracing Web 2.0: Archives and the Newest Generation of Web Applications.” American Archivist 72 (1): 42–71.10.17723/aarc.72.1.k73112x7n0773111Suche in Google Scholar

Seeman, D. 2012. “Naming Names: The Ethics of Identification in Digital Library Metadata.” Knowledge Organization 39 (5): 325–31.10.5771/0943-7444-2012-5-325Suche in Google Scholar

Short, J. 2014. “Take Ten to Tag! Smithsonian Gardens Public Tagging Initiative.” Technical Services Quarterly 31 (4): 319–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/07317131.2014.943005.Suche in Google Scholar

Sillitoe, P. J. 2014. “Diplomatic Analysis of Technical Drawings: Developing New Theory for Practical Application.” Archival Science 14: 125–68. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10502-013-9206-9.Suche in Google Scholar

Skinner, J. 2014. “Metadata in Archival and Cultural Heritage Settings: A Review of the Literature.” Journal of Library Metadata 14 (1): 52–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/19386389.2014.891892.Suche in Google Scholar

Smith-Yoshimura, K., C. J. Godby, H. Koffler, K. Varnum, and E. Yakel. 2011. Social Metadata for Libraries, Archives and Museums. Part 2: Survey Analysis. Dublin, OH: OCLC Research. https://www.oclc.org/research/publications/2012/2012-01r.html (accessed March 1, 2020).Suche in Google Scholar

Smith-Yoshimura, K., and R. Holley. 2012. Social Metadata for Libraries, Archives, and Museums. Part 3: Recommendations and Readings. Dublin, OH: OCLC Research. https://www.oclc.org/research/publications/2012/2012-01r.html. (accessed March 1, 2020).Suche in Google Scholar

Smith-Yoshimura, K., and C. Shein. 2011. Social Metadata for Libraries, Archives and Museums Part 1: Site Reviews. Dublin, OH: OCLC Research. https://www.oclc.org/research/publications/2012/2012-01r.html (accessed March 1, 2020).Suche in Google Scholar

Society of American Archivists. 2004. Describing Archives: A Content Standard. Chicago: Society of American Archivists.Suche in Google Scholar

Society of American Archivists. 2019. Describing Archives: A Content Standard, DACS 2019.0.3. Chicago: Society of American Archivists.Suche in Google Scholar

Sternfield, J. 2011. “Archival Theory and Digital Historiography: Selection, Search, and Metadata as Archival Processes for Assessing Historical Contextualization.” American Archivist 74 (2): 544–75.10.17723/aarc.74.2.644851p6gmg432h0Suche in Google Scholar

Sweetser, M., and A. A. A. Orchard. 2019. “Are We Coming Together? The Archival Descriptive Landscape and the Roles of Archivist and Cataloger.” American Archivist 82 (2): 1–50.10.17723/aarc-82-02-18Suche in Google Scholar

Theimer, K. 2011. “What Is the Meaning of Archives 2.0?” American Archivist 74 (1): 58–68.10.17723/aarc.74.1.h7tn4m4027407666Suche in Google Scholar

Tognoli, N. B., A. C. Rodrigues, and J. A. C. Guimarães. 2019. “Archival Knowledge: Conceptual Frameworks for Recent Terminology in the KO Domain.” Knowledge Organization 46 (7): 522–29.10.5771/0943-7444-2019-7-522Suche in Google Scholar

Trace, C. B., and A. Dillon. 2012. “The Evolution of the Finding Aid in the United States: From Physical to Digital Document Genre.” Archival Science 12 (2012): 501–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10502-012-9190-5.Suche in Google Scholar

van Hooland, S., E. M. Rodriguez, and I. Boydens. 2011. “Between Commodification and Engagement: On the Double-Edged Impact of User-Generated Metadata Within the Cultural Heritage Sector.” Library Trends 59 (4): 707–20. https://doi.org/10.1353/lib.2011.0011.Suche in Google Scholar

Van Ness, C. 2010. “Much Ado about Paper Clips: ‘More Product, Less Process’ and the Modern Manuscript Repository.” American Archivist 73 (1): 129–45.10.17723/aarc.73.1.v17jn363512j545kSuche in Google Scholar

Wick, A. 2019. “We’re All Vegans Here: The Twenty-First Century Archival Ecosystem.” 2019. Journal of Archival Organization 14 (1–2): 13–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/15332748.2018.1503020.Suche in Google Scholar

Zhang, J. 2012. “Archival Context, Digital Content, and the Ethics of Digital Archival Representation.” Knowledge Organization 39 (5): 332–39.10.5771/0943-7444-2012-5-332Suche in Google Scholar