You are browsing the archive for Case Studies.

真的需要政府部門網站嗎?

- July 5, 2016 in Case Studies, eSpace, Featured

從建置政府網站到維運政府網站的工作經驗中,從地方機關網站、計畫網站、部門網站,到初步瀏覽最近公布的第二屆政府網站競賽得獎作品,深刻的體會到: 民眾需要的是政府服務平台,而不是政府網站:人民需要的是可以信任的資訊來源,政府網站上的資訊應該都是可信度較高的訊息、每個人都可以了解的內容,即時、正確、可追溯的政府資訊,是人民所需要的。 需要減輕民眾在取得資訊時的負擔:訊息管道眾多,統一的訊息公布網站是必要的。目前在台灣,可以透過政府入口網,依照不同的主題來取得相關的政府資訊與所需要的服務,而不是透過找尋相關部門再至該部門網站取得自己需要的服務。 透過網路推廣政策是必要但非唯一管道:如前所言,人民需要的是服務,而不是政策廣宣或是部門形象網站。民眾希望在網站上取得自己所需要的服務,政府可以透過網站、各種行銷方式來推廣政策,但門網站不是政策推廣的唯一方式。許多政府部門會落入行銷的迷思中,認為網路行銷會是政策行銷的唯一方式,卻忽略了政府與商業公司的不同性。政策是對全國人民,應該透過各種方式推廣,網路推廣是因應時代與科技改變所必要的管道,但不是唯一的方法。 站在人民的需求提供服務而不是建置政策廣宣、部門形象平台:在文章的開頭有提到,政府部門的網站分為很多種,但目前有不少網站對民眾的需求可能還不如提供一頁索引,讓民眾知道自己有需求產生時,要去哪裡找到服務窗口來得便捷,從今年的政府網站賽中可以觀察到,都是以民眾需求為出發點所建置的政府網站,而不是以部門本位角度所建立的網站。 網站是否能滿足不同語言使用者的需求?因應不同語言的需求,每個語言版本的頁面資訊與服務是否一致?部門內部的雇員是否了解自己部門網站的內容?是否具足資訊能力管理及維運網站?有無足夠的網路行銷能力與公關能力去面對網路社群?就網站的永續性來看,部門內部有無足夠的預算去維護不同語言版本的網站,使政府資訊達到一致性、正確性、即時性? 政府部門應該專注於提供即時且正確、可信度高的資料讓民間應用:在捷運車廂中看到台北市政府的新版旅遊網站上線了,在廣告文宣上除了打上網址,還特別提到與知名旅遊評論網站TripAdvisor合作。對一個非台灣籍的旅客來說,他在來台灣前可能已先瀏覽TripAdvisor網站或讀了Lonely Planet,而不是先考慮台北市政府的旅遊網站;對台灣本地旅客來說,他可能會先查閱背包客棧、ptt、愛評網或各式各樣的旅遊相關社群資訊平台、部落格,也不會是先瀏覽政府網站。 政府部門的優勢是提供正確、即時性、可信度高的資料,例如合法的民宿有哪些?合法的旅行代辦有哪些?合法的租車公司有哪些?哪些地方可以租借農機具?哪些農地是可以租用?哪些房屋可以租用?哪個地方的交通事故發生的較頻繁?哪些地段的房價(租金)是多少?把這些資料都釋放出來,讓民間自己建立自己所需要的服務網站,而不是由政府部門在有限的預算內建立政府部門網站,可能還會因為預算不足而無法提供對應的服務。政府部門應該專注於提供資料,讓民間去發揮創意拼湊出自己的符合需求的服務,加上不是每個部會都有人可以專心營運、每年的預算也有限,政府部門也可以將網站建置與維運的心力與資源,轉為專注於規劃政府所應該制定的網路科技政策、提供即時且正確的資料並定期維護更新。 政府部門的網站數量並不代表著一個國家電子化的程度:參考了日本早稻田大學電子政府治理研究所於2015年6月公布的電子化政府評比結果,從評比的九項指標中可以得知早稻田大學對於電子化政府評比著重在網路基礎建設、資訊安全、民眾的參與管道、網路政策與管理並特別強調電子化服務,如採購、稅務、保健、一站具足的資訊系統,若是與「網站」有關的評比指標,則是著眼於網站的設計、互動性與技術,並不在於政府網站數的多寡。觀察了自2013至2015三年中年台灣在該評比中的表現:  
年度 2013 2014 2015
總排名/評比國家數 8 / 55 18 / 61 17 / 63
成績 83.52 74.51 72.76
在APEC成員中的排名 5 8 8
  並把台灣在這三年中的九項指標表現比較,可以得知2014年時,台灣分別在:National Portal、GCIO、e-Government promotion、Open Government等四個項目中出現,但在2015年時,只在e-Government promotion項目中取得第九名,較去年而言是退步一名,整體而言,台灣在2015年的評比表現的並不理想。 台灣政府網站愈來愈多,從原本的.gov.tw到看不出是政府網站網址的.tw或*.taipei,自要求各部會提高政府網站親和力與2014年開始大力推廣將政府網站改為響應式網站以符合不同手持式裝置需求、大力要求各部會機關與縣市政府使用社群平台增加與民眾互動的同時,台灣的電子化政府程度反而在國際評比間呈現退步,在2015年的評比結果中只看到政府努力的推廣電子化政府,在基礎建設與管理機制、相關政策制定上都沒有較明顯的表現。  
評比指標 2013年排名 2014年排名 2015年排名
Network Preparedness/Infrastructure 網路設施與基礎建設
Management Optimization/ Efficiency 最適化且有效的管理
Online Services / Functioning Applications 線上服務與應用 2
National Portal/Homepage 國家等級的入口網站 11
Government CIO 政府資訊長 8 12
e-Government Promotion 電子化政府的推動 8 9
E-Participation/Digital Inclusion 電子化參與
Open Government 開放政府 11
Cyber Security 網路安全
  如果政府部門有完整的相關規劃,各部會之間能有共識在跨部會的平台上提供資料或資訊,方便民眾統一取得,例如建立政府資料開放平台或是統一的政府資訊公開平台,讓需要資料的開發者或研究人員可以在一個網站中取得他所要的各部會的資料並運用以建置服務,讓開發者可以透過自己所開發的服務取得利潤;或建置統一的政府資訊公開平台,讓人民可以在這個資訊平台中取得各部會所公布的統計資訊、報告等業務相關資訊,以應用、功能、服務的角度出發,提供跨部會的資料與資訊,都更優於把資源投入在民間網站建置業者該做的業務中,這點是多年來建置與維運政府網站的建議。 附件:早稻田大學2015年電子化政府評比指標
Indictor Sub-indicators
Network Preparedness/Infrastructure 網路設施與基礎建設 1-1 Internet Users 1-2 Broadband Subscribers 1-3 Mobile Cellular Subscribers
Management Optimization/ Efficiency 最適化且有效的管理 2-1 Optimization Awareness 2-2 Integrated Enterprise Architecture 2-3 Administrative and Budgetary Systems
Online Services / Functioning Applications 線上服務與應用 3-1 E-Procurement 3-2 E-Tax Systems 3-3 E-Custom Systems 3-4 E-Health System 3-5 One-stop service
National Portal/Homepage 國家等級的入口網站 4-1 Navigation 4-2 Interactivity 4-3 Interface 4-4 Technical Aspects
Government CIO 政府資訊長 5-1 GCIO Presence 5-2 GCIO Mandate 5-3 CIO Organizations 5-4 CIO Development Programs
e-Government Promotion 電子化政府的推動 6-1 Legal Mechanism 6-2 Enabling Mechanism 6-3 Support Mechanism 6-4 Assessment Mechanism
E-Participation/Digital Inclusion 電子化參與 7-1 E-Information Mechanisms 7-2 Consultation 7-3 Decision-Making
Open Government 開放政府 8-1 Legal Framework 8-2 Society 8-3 Organization
Cyber Security 網路安全 9-1 Legal Framework 9-2 Cyber Crime Countermeasure 9-3 Internet Security Organization
  作者:YZ

Think big, start small, move fast

- February 24, 2016 in Case Studies, eSpace, Featured

How the York Museums Trust started opening up its collection – OpenGLAM Case study More and more libraries, museums and other cultural institutions publish their collections online, often allowing users to reuse the material for research or creative purpose by licensing it openly. For institutions that start planning such a step, it may seem daunting […]

Think big, start small, move fast

- February 24, 2016 in Case Studies, eSpace, Featured

How the York Museums Trust started opening up its collection – OpenGLAM Case study More and more libraries, museums and other cultural institutions publish their collections online, often allowing users to reuse the material for research or creative purpose by licensing it openly. For institutions that start planning such a step, it may seem daunting […]

Dutch cultural heritage reaches millions every month

- June 23, 2015 in Case Studies, cultural analytics, Featured, GLAM, GLAMetrics, metrics, News, Open Content, Open Cultuur Data, WIkipedia

The cultural sector increasingly makes its collections available as open data and open content. These types of initiatives bring along the growing need of measuring their impact. On either a national or international level, there currently is no single body that tracks this type of data across collections. In 2014, the Open Culture Data network therefore […]

Open Rubens – the new and improved Rubens Online

- October 14, 2014 in Case Studies, Featured, Guest Blog Post

This is a guest blog post about the Open Rubens platform written by Joris Janssens of Packed, one of the partners of the Europeana Space (eSpace) project. Open Rubens won the public prize during the Opencultuurdata.be competition 2013. PACKED is a centre of expertise in digital heritage and promotes the use of standards for the […]

Case Study: Remixing Openly Licensed Content in the Public Space

- July 8, 2013 in Case Studies, Featured, Guest Blog Post

This post is written by Merete Sanderhoff, who works at the Statens Museum for Kunst (SMK), the National Gallery of Denmark, as researcher and project manager, leading a number of projects providing open access to the museum’s digitized collections, and using digital media to freely share knowledge and resources with fellow institutions as well as users. She is also a member of the OpenGLAM Advisory Board In 2012, the Statens Museum fur Kunst (SMK) in Copenhagen decided to make a small batch of 160 high quality digital images of their public domain collection openly available on the web. The museum’s choice of open licenses is driven by a strong wish to encourage sharing and creative and innovative reuse of our digitized collections. Pilot projects have taught us that the need for openly licensed images and cultural heritage data is growing – not only among fellow institutions, but in the educational sector, Wikipedia, and on social media platforms in general – and likewise, that the willingness to share high quality images and data in the Danish museum community is growing.

The art pilots at work. Click for more images

In order to move from good intentions to concrete action, SMK has started a couple of initiatives to encourage museums to share their digitized collections, and the public to put them into use in new interactive ways. One of our recent initiatives is HintMe – a shared mobile museum platform – described at length in this case study on the Europeana Pro blog. Here I will talk about a more recent initiative: Remix art on the Copenhagen metro fences. The Copenhagen Metro is being expanded, predictably causing frustration for the people living next to the construction sites. As a positive countermove, the Copenhagen Metro Company works very creatively with decorating the metro fences, often in partnership with local communities. SMK has entered such a partnership, using our charter collection of open images as the raw material. This partnership has allowed SMK to explore several aspects of being an OpenGLAM institution (according to the OpenGLAM principles):
  • To bring our collections to the public
  • To collaborate with external communities of users
  • To provide the framework and resources, and then step back and see what people do with the digitized artworks
  • To let go of control over how our collections are perceived, used, and create meaning and value to people
In our partnership with the Copenhagen Metro Company, SMK is represented by Young People’s Laboratories for Art (ULK) – a community of young “art pilots” who meet at SMK once a week to do volunteer work on creative projects. So far, they have mostly worked peer-to-peer with other young people, for instance at Roskilde Festival. As I mentioned in my talk at Open Culture in London July 2nd the Metro project has offered them a new set of challenges. Collaborating with all kinds of locals living by the metro fences – families with kids, elderly people etc. – they have run into highly diverse perceptions of art and what is permissible to do with the artworks. To the art pilots, so-called ‘digital natives‘, it’s a natural and deeply rooted thing to remix the digitized artworks, do mashups, collages and Photoshop manipulations, in a seemless blend of “high and low” culture. To some of the locals around the construction sites, especially those of older generations, this approach to art seemed at first almost like an assault to the original artworks. This resulted in a lot of very productive discussions and negotiations between the art pilots and the locals who participated in project meetings and workshops. To SMK it has been interesting to discover that our own efforts to let go of control over our digitized artworks that are in the Public Domain – and therefore may be used by the public without restrictions – can offend the art perception of some users. Paradoxically, in this case it is not so much the museum, but the users, who worry about misuse and vandalism towards the artworks’ integrity when they are shared openly with the public. As such, the Metro project is a learning process for SMK where we reap new knowledge about how the public may wish to share and reuse digitized cultural heritage, and how they create new value for themselves and each other in the process. Opening up our digitized collections is all about letting go of the monopoly to define what art is and can be used for. Here and here, more photos can be found of the two metro fence revamps we have contributed to. Our initiatives with open images are inspired by the ideas behind Shelley Bernstein’s crowd-curated exhibitions at Brooklyn Museum, and by design principles in Nina Simon’s book The Participatory Museum (2010), among others.

Walters Art Museum Removes Non Commercial License

- April 25, 2013 in Case Studies, Featured

In early January, we wrote about the Walters Art Museum as a case study in sharing. The museum is a pioneering open advocate and worked extensively with Wikimedia. They have donated over 18.000 images to Wikimedia Commons and hired a dedicated intern to enrich Wikipedia articles with openly licensed content from their collection. The Walters has also set up a website with a dump of all their high quality scans of manuscripts and the corresponding metadata. The images can be downloaded in different file sizes, from a very small thumbnail, to the extremely high quality .tiff file of about 150 megabytes. Having images of this size available for re-use makes them a great resource for scholarly research and image annotation. However, the readme page still mentioned at that point that commercial re-use of these images was not allowed. As mentioned previously on the OpenGLAM blog, this greatly reduces the possibilities for re-use. The images can for example not be used in Wikipedia articles and we were also not able to feature them on the Public Domain Review. For that reason we contacted the web manager and we are very happy to see that the Walters has now changed their licensing to the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike license (CC-BY-SA).
You are free to download and use the images and descriptions on this website under the licenses named above. You do not need to apply to the Walters prior to using the images. We ask only that you cite the source of the images as the Walters Art Museum.
The Walters also explicitly distances itself from the non-commercial restriction:
Note these terms mark a change from our previous license, which placed a noncommercial restriction on the use of these materials. The noncommercial restriction no longer applies, and this license supercedes the previously advertised license, and replaces that found in many of the archival TIFF image headers. This change follows the Walters Art Museum’s licensing policy. More information on the Walters’ intellectual property policy can be found on the Walters website: http://art.thewalters.org/license/.
It is great to see that the Walters has made a clear and explicit statement about the licensing of their images. Very often still we run into vague or non-existent statements that greatly reduce the possibilities for third parties to re-use the data and content. For that reason one of the five OpenGLAM principles is: “When publishing data make an explicit and robust statement of your wishes and expectations with respect to reuse and repurposing of the descriptions, the whole data collection, and subsets of the collection.” The statement of the Walters Art Museum can be seen as a good example how to do this. For more beautiful digitised manuscripts see The Digital Walters webpage.

One year later: Linked Open Data in the German National Library

- April 19, 2013 in Case Studies, Featured

A little more than a year ago, the German National Library (DNB) announced that it would release more data as linked data under an open license. It was decided that the metadata would be released with as little restrictions as possible by using the CC0 rights waiver. This means that anybody can use and reuse the data in any way possible, also for commercial purposes. Now one year later, we talk with Lars G. Svensson, Advisor for Knowledge Networking at the DNB, about what this move has meant for the library. Welcome Lars, thank you for taking the time. Thank you for having me!

Frankfurt Lesesaal by Raimond Spekking – CC-BY-SA

Could you tell me why the library decided to open up the metadata? In September 2011 the Conference of European National Librarians (CENL) decided to adopt CC0 licensing for their data. The DNB had started to publish authority data as linked data in spring 2010. We first used a home-grown license based partly on CC BY-SA but with the restriction that commercial entities needed to register before they can use the data. Since our Director General had been one of the supporters of the CENL decision it was natural for us to move in the same direction. One of the key points with linked data is that other people have to be able to reuse and connect the data with other sources. For that reason we decided last year to discontinue the license based on CC BY-SA and go for CC0 in order to have as few restrictions as possible for reuse. Currently, we publish two datasets: The first one is the authority data, which consists of data for names of persons, organizations, events, places, and works. Since January 2012 there is also bibliographic data available with title, publisher etc., which re-uses the authority data. The data is available under CC0 in many formats including RDF. The only exception is bibliographic data in library specific formats (MARC 21 and MARC XML) from the last two years but we expect that this restriction will disappear after 2015. And have you seen interesting cases of reuse so far? Yes definitely. One of my favourite projects is the Museum Digital. This is a German digital open platform where smaller institutions can put their content. The museums curate and manage their own database on the site and enter their own metadata. The site included our metadata to create more links from and to the content available on the platform. They also found out that we include a link to DBpedia in our data. This allowed them to import that data into the platform in various languages. This greatly enriches the information on the platform. Not all libraries are in the position to release their own metadata because they make use of services and are therefore not the owners of the data. How does that work in the DNB? We are in the fortunate position to be the national library, so it is basically our job to create this data in the first place. That allows us to freely distribute it in any way we want to. The authority data is curated together with the German library networks, so that is not really our data, but it was not a problem to agree on the open license.. As we are all public institutions, openness helps us to reach out to the public. Does the German National Library also provide access to digitised books? We are a relatively young library which was founded in 1913. For that reason we don’t have that much material that is in the public domain. So we do digitise our collection, but since we are not the owners of the rights we can only show the material to people in the reading rooms in the library. We try to make the books that are out of copyright as accessible as possible. We started for example with a collection with 100 classic books such as the works of Goethe and Schiller. These are freely accessible – also in Europeana – as they are in the public domain and we currently have large digitisiation projects also comprising out-of-copyright material. A further service we offer is digitization of tables of contents; Those are very popular among our users since they offer both more terminology we can index in our catalogue and more contextual information making it easier for our patrons to decide whether the publication they found suits their needs or not. Great to hear, and what’s next for the library? We are still in the transition phase so not all metadata is yet openly available in all formats, we expect that this will happen in the next few years and then our metadata will be completely open. We keep improving our linked datasets and work hard to also get to make more content available. That’s great, thank you very much for taking the time for this interview! My pleasure!

Dutch National Library gives full access to in copyright material

- March 11, 2013 in Case Studies, Featured

The National Library of the Netherlands has made over the last years some great digitisation efforts. Amongst others, they have published their medieval manuscript collection and made their newspaper archive available under an open license. To make this material available they have to overcome many copyright issues. Their huge collection of material is created by many different authors. It can take years to track all the inheritors to ask for permission. For that reason they have experimented with an ‘opt-out’ model where they asked authors or inheritors to contact them when they did not want something to be published.

Page from the magazine “Op de Hoogte, een maandschrift voor de huiskamer” (Up to Date, a magazine for the living room), 1903.

In September 2012, the National Library of the Netherlands (Koninklijke Bibliotheek, KB) announced that they would publicise their digitised magazines collection from 1890-1939. Some of the articles or photos in the magazines are still under copyright because the material is only out of copyright 70 years after the death of the author. Because magazines are filled with content from many different authors, some parts of a magazine can be out of copyright, but others are not. They calculated that looking for all the inheritors of all the authors in the magazines would take them about 5 years and a lot of money, money that can be used a lot better to actually digitise material. For that reason they announced that they would make all available and requested authors to let them know if they had a problem with that. They exactly got one response from a family member of an author which loved the idea that his grandfather’s material would be made available again. They also got a letter from two collective copyrights management organisations. They informed the KB they were representing some of the authors, and suggested to settle the copyrights. Because no complete and practicle inventory of rightholders and members of copyright organisations could be made, the KB has agreed on a collective license for all under copyright material. The Royal Library can show all the magazines and everybody is able to browse through them and use them for research. However, when somebody wants to reuse them commercially, they have to get in touch with the rights management organisations. It is a great achievement that material of which parts of are potentially still under copyright can be made available without doing years of research first. While the commercial value of these magazines is very little, there are great opportunities for research as these magazines give a great insight in what was going on in the Dutch society during that period. Right now, 80 magazines can be found online with a total of 1,5 million digitised pages. In the coming months, more magazines will be added and a stunning total of 6,5 million pages will be made available. However, because it was not posible to use one clear and open license, it remains rather unclear when a user has to ask the collective rights organisation for approval. As we have written before, it is very hard to define when a digitised work is being used commercially. It is for example not clear if we can feature these works on the Public Domain Review while this is clearly a not-for-profit effort. We hope that someday the material which is most likely completely out of copyright can be made available free to reuse without any restrictions, as all material in the public domain should be. All the magazines can be found on their website.

Case Study: Rijksmuseum releases 111.000 high quality images to the public domain.

- February 27, 2013 in Case Studies, Featured

When it come to open cultural heritage data and content, the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam is widely recognised as a pioneer. What started as an experiment, has now resulted in 111.000 (and counting) high-quality images of famous paintings such as the Nightwatch as well as numerous other works of art by Rembrandt, Vermeer, Goltzius etc. becoming openly available on the web. In 2011, the Rijksmuseum has started to look into the possibilities of releasing some of their images on the web. At that point the Dutch Open Cultuur Data initiative contacted the museum and asked if they could make some images available for the Apps4Amsterdam competition. At that point, it was decided that also the high quality scans of their most famous works should be made accessible in order to promote the collection of the museum to a wider audience. They continued working on clearing the rights and to get the descriptive information right. This has now resulted in 111.000 digital images of artworks that are in the public domain that they can offer without any copyright restrictions. The images are made available as a download, but also via an API. At the end of 2012, this was accompanied with the launch of the Rijksstudio where people can more easily get access to the material and create their own exhibition. It is encouraged to take and reuse the images in any way possible and to share the results with the Rijksmuseum. At the same time the museum sells images via their image bank. While the high quality images of about 2 mb are freely available, the museum charges a small fee for the huge tiff files of about 150 mb. The museum has indicated that so far they have not seen a drop in the amount of images they sell to commercial companies and they now occasionally sell images to regular users as well. Also at the tourist shop no decline in sales has been noticed so far. Metrics:
  • 300.000 people visit the Rijksstudio each month.
  • 500 times a year an API-key is requested
  • 30 apps that use data from the Rijksmuseum can now be found in the different app stores.
Besides that, as being one of the first institutions to open up on this scale, the Rijksmuseum is now being used as an example all over the world which has generated a lot of positive attention.