A Digital Library Exhibit

Cables and LaceIn my previous post, I discussed the creation of my digital library, the development of a Collection and Content Policy and the issues I encountered when creating metadata for the collection. The final part of this assignment for our Digital Libraries (IS40560) class was to create a poster or exhibit about the collection, either as an online presentation in Omeka or as a paper-based poster. I created an exhibit called Cables and Lace. Below is the essay I submitted detailing the visual choices made as well as challenges and issues related to information presentation.

For my exhibition I decided to focus on two different knitting techniques that serve a similar function but in very different ways. I hope that my exhibition will inspire users to consider different knitting techniques and how that can enhance the overall knitted items well as motivating users to consider how these techniques can be used in non-traditional ways. The exhibition also serves as a marketing tool to draw in new users to the library by using strong visual elements. Items in the exhibition are taken from a range of collections within the digital library to encourage users to further explore the digital library as a whole rather than focusing on individual collections.

Exhibition inspiration

Cables and Lace, as explained in the introduction to the exhibition, are two means of adding texture and visual interest to a knitted item in very different ways. Cables use crossed stitches to add density to the knitted fabric while lace techniques open up the fabric by using various increase and decrease stitches.

The exhibition also aspires to inspiring users to consider non-traditional ways of using these techniques. For example, within the Cables section of the exhibition the example is given of a knitted necklace designed to give the illusion of a cable. Similarly, the girl’s dress in the lace section of the exhibition shows how use of lace techniques can add interesting detail to garments. A blanket is also featured in both sections of the exhibition, showing how lace and cables can be used together with interesting effect.

The exhibition also serves as a marketing tool for users who may still consider knitting as something their Granny does. I hope to dispel the myth that knitting is only for older ladies who knit Aran jumpers for their families. The examples used within the exhibition show that knitting can produce beautiful, modern and versatile pieces.

Exhibition Design

The design of the exhibition uses the same theme as the whole digital library. This should give impression that it fits seamlessly into the library, rather than feeling like a separate website. It is designed to give context to the wider collections and as such function as part of the library.

Adding two distinct sections – cables and lace – to the exhibition allows the user to compare and contrast the two techniques while the addition of the blanket to both sections serves as a link between them. Within each section I chose a highly visual layout that highlighted the images of the items. I hope that this is not only aesthetically pleasing to me but I hope this would also appeal to my users.

Challenges

Similar to challenges faced with Omeka, my main frustration was the limitation in control over how things display. For example Omkea asks the digital librarian to create an exhibition, then to create sections within that exhibition and finally to create pages within each section. While I can see the logic of this within a larger exhibition, for a smaller exhibition such as Cables and Lace this adds a lot of redundancy for the end user. I would have preferred the option to simply add my content directly to the different sections rather than having to create additional pages within each section.

From an aesthetic point of view I would have preferred the option to add a logo or selected images within the collection to the front page of the exhibition, however this is not possible. We live in a society with a limited attention span and the addition of visual interest to the front page of the exhibition would give the opportunity to entice users through our virtual doors.

Advertisements

Sunshine on a Sunny Day

I was about to type we’ve been having some unseasonably warm weather. However, it’s exactly the weather you might expect for early June, except it’s been a few years since we’ve had such a good stretch of sunny weather. Or at least that’s how it feels.

Sunflower shawl 055As I mentioned in a previous post I treated myself to some Coolree Merino Silk fingering weight in Sienna Yellows. Sunflowers have always been one of my favourite flowers. I’m also slightly obsessed with chevron patterns at the moment. And, ochre yellow is my current favourite colour, so this Sunflower Shawl pattern felt like fate. I love the yarn, I love the colour and I love the pattern.

Sunflower shawl 037The pattern is really well written and lovely to knit. The designer gives instruction for lace weight, fingering weight and DK, in two different sizes. The pattern said I would need 550 yards of fingering, while I only had about 440 yards. But I felt I could skip a few pattern repeats and not run out of yarn. So I carefully measured my remaining yarn after each repeat.

Beginning 105g
A+B (1)=98g
A+B (2)=93g
A+B (3)=86g
C=77g
D (1-18) x1=60g
D (19-26)=52g
D (1-18) x2=30g
E=17g

Sunflower shawl 032I repeated chart B three times instead of four. When I realised I was going to have enough yarn to do the fourth repeat I was tempted to rip back and add in the fourth repeat, however as I was about to start chart E I just couldn’t bring myself to do it. So I would have had enough yarn despite the fact that the the pattern suggested I needed a lot more.

Ah well, I’m still so happy with the finished shawl. It’s perfect for this glorious weather and I hope when the clouds inevitably return it will be lovely to be able to inject a bit of sunshine into an outfit.

Creating a Digital Library

Omeka screenshotFor our Digital Libraries (IS40560) class we were asked to create create a small digital library using Omeka, a web-publishing platform that allows anyone to create a website to display collections and build digital exhibitions.

I created the Repository of Knitted Items to preserve and exhibit examples of hand knitted objects in a digital environment. As this was a student assignment it contains only examples of my own knitted items. The first part of the assignment required us to develop a collection and content policy. Then we had to populate our digital library, creating metadata, collections and generally play with Omeka to see what it could do. Below is the essay I wrote about my digital library creation experience.

Creating my Digital Library

Kucsma et al (2010) compare Omeka to WordPress in terms of its design, ease of use and high level of functionality. I consider myself to be very computer literate with a high level of technical skills. I have also previously used WordPress and so I expected creating a digital library in Omeka to be a relatively easy exercise. And it was, but it was not without its frustrations either.

For me, overall, I found Omeka to be too restrictive, with very little customisation options. I found it clunky to navigate compared to WordPress and was frustrated, for example, by the lack of a link on the public site to the dashboard when logged in. Even within the dashboard I didn’t find the navigation terribly intuitive. For example, to edit some of the visual settings the user must click on ‘settings’, ‘themes’ and the ‘configure’, rather than having some of these options part of the main settings.

I appreciate, however, that for a less techie person, this might be an ideal platform. I also appreciate that I was using the basic package and that upgrading to a paid-for package would give me greater design freedom. I took advantage of the plugins that are available on the basic package. These included Exhibit builder, Simple Pages and Library of Congress Suggest.

Populating my Digital Library

I used Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH) for the Subject element within Dublin Core metadata using the Library of Congress Suggest plugin. I tried to be as comprehensive as possible when adding metadata to my objects; however was again frustrated that the subject terms are not clickable within each item, as you might expect from a library catalogue.

In terms of Dublin Core itself, I found this quite restrictive too as there was no way to add qualifiers to elements, for example I wanted to add qualifiers to the date to explain what it referred to – in this case the date the knitted item was finished. Kucsma et al (2010) also refer to the ability to qualify Dublin Core elements, however I believe these options are only available with a paid-for account. I wanted to record the needle size, yarn and colour of the knitted item but had to resort to including these details in the free-text Description field, standardising within my digital library the way in which I coded this information. I also added the information to the tags for each item in the library to aid searching.

Gill et al. (2008) caution that quality metadata creation is essential and advocate “establishing and enforcing processes and procedures” within an institution. I also found this to be true. For a larger project it would certainly be necessary to spend more time considering the metadata elements in terms of the objects I was trying to catalogue. For example, I had to keep reminding myself that I was recording metadata about the object in the image, not the image itself as my digital library collects digital images of knitted items, rather than the physical items themselves.

The CSV Import plugin would help with importing metadata, allowing the librarian to catalogue large numbers of objects in a spreadsheet before upload this to Omeka. This would be particularly useful as there is no way to batch edit objects in Omeka, should you change your mind about how your objects should be described, as I did on a few occasions. It would have been much easier to make changes in a spreadsheet than it was to edit each item individually, and I only have 15 items. Palmer and Knutson (2004) also found that ‘the basic work of creating, reconciling, and updating item metadata is a huge undertaking even for resource-rich institutions’.

Items in my digital library are licenced under a Creative Commons: Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs license (Creative Commons (n.d.)). This allows users to share, copy, distribute and transmit the objects and images as long as the work is attributed to the digital library and is for non-commercial use. Derivatives of the work are not permitted under the licence. Omeka allows the digital librarian to add this information and display the licence information on the homepage. Dublin Core also allows this information to be recorded for each item, which would be very useful if different objects could be licenced under different conditions.

The Future of my Digital Library

The value of a repository of knitted items is to record our cultural heritage, to record the creative output for future generations and to record the evolution of knitting trends. To this end I would consider connecting my library to other cultural institutions, for example museums or other institutions dealing with the history of textiles or crafts. A joint exhibition could be created using examples of knitting through the centuries, creating a collaborative history of textiles. The Repository of Knitted Items would contribute modern examples of knitting to the historical context.

To keep libraries, digital or otherwise, vibrant it would be necessary to connect to the community, as recommended by Pomerantz & Marchionini (2007). To facilitate this, our library would solicit further submissions to the library from the wider knitting community. By crediting members of the community who submit their knitted items to the library, we hope that they will actively engage with the collections and feel a sense of participation within the library.

References

Creative Commons (n.d.) Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs. Retrieved from http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/

Gill, T., Gilliland, A.J., Whalen, M. and Woodley, M.S. (2008). Introduction to Metadata. Retrieved from http://www.getty.edu/research/publications/electronic_publications/intrometadata/index.html.

Kucsma, J., Reiss, K. & Sidman, A. (2010). Using Omeka to Build Digital Collections: The METRO Case Study. D-Lib Magazine, 16(3/4). Retrieved from http://www.dlib.org/dlib/march10/kucsma/03kucsma.html

Palmer, Carole L. and Ellen M. Knutson. 2004. Metadata practices and implications for federated collections. In Proceedings of the 67th Annual Meeting of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Edited by Linda Schamber & Carol L. Barry. Medford, NJ: Information Today, Inc: 456-462.

Pomerantz, J., & Marchionini, G. (2007). The Digital Library as Place. Journal of Documentation, 63(4), 505-533.

Yet another shawl – Renita

Semester 2 shawls 050At the beginning of Semester 2 I decided I needed a fairly straight forward project that I could work on in the evenings when my brain shut down. After spending far too much time on the Ravelry pattern search I chose Renita which is  a “shawlette with a shallow triangle shape”. It’s knit side to side so each row only has a small amount of lace that I felt would keep me interested. Blocking really helped to open up the lace and finish the shawl.

Semester 2 shawls 040I used some of my beautiful Coolree yarn, Alpaca/Silk/Cashmere in Hokusai’s Wave. So yummy and soft and  a dream to knit with. The other thing I liked about this side to side shawl was that I could measure how much yarn I was using and when I had used a little left than half I started decreasing instead of increasing to make the most of the yarn I had.

Semester 2 shawls 060I also felt that the shape would be very wearable as a scarf, although now I’m not so sure. I’ve yet to actually wear this. It might be gifted at some point if I find the right person. The yarn is quite expensive so it seems a pity for it to sit unworn, but as a process knitter (rather than a product knitter) that only bothers me a bit. The yarn is so soft, almost too soft so the top rolls a bit despite the garter based lace border.