Web Preservation in a Web 2.0 Environment (Brian Kelly, UKOLN)

Web Preservation in a Web 2.0 Environment Brian Kelly UKOLN University of Bath Bath, UK Email [email_address] UKOLN is supported by: http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/web-focus/events/workshops/jisc-powr-2008-09/ About This Talk Will use of Web 2.0 services lead to new preservation concerns? And how should we respond to these new challenges? This work is licensed under a Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.5 licence (but note caveat) Resources bookmarked using ‘ jisc-powr-2008-09 ' tag

Is Web 2.0 Different? Implications of Web 2.0 for Web site preservation: Use of 3 rd party services (‘ network as platform ’) Content  collaboration and communication Richer diversity of services (not just a file on a filestore/CMS/database) More complex IPR issues Let’s look at: Case study 1 - wikis Case study 2 – blogs Case study 3 – reusing data Case study 4 – comms tools Case study 5 – recording events Case study 6 – Slideshare Case study 7 – Use of video tools Case study 8 – social networks Web 2.0

Case Study 1: A Public Wiki WetPaint wiki used to support various workshops Approaches taken: Open access to all prior to & during event (to minimise barriers to creating content) Access restricted to WetPaint users after event Access later restricted to event organisers Web 2.0 Many aspects of Web site curation are to do with implementing such best practices, rather than implementing technical solutions See JISC PoWR blog post

Case Study 1: A Public Wiki WetPaint provides an option for backing up data. A zipped file of the pages can be saved for storing on a locally managed service. Web 2.0 There are limitations in this particular service (poor quality HTML, internal links don’t work, …) But this does illustrate an approach which can be taken.

Case Study 2a: Blog Migration How might you migrate the contents of a blog (e.g. you’re leaving college)? This question was raised by Casey Leaver, shortly before leaving Warwick University Web 2.0

Case Study 2a: Blog Migration She migrated her blog from blogs at Warwick Univ to Wordpress Web 2.0 Note, though, that not all data was transferred (e.g. title, but not contents) so there’s a need to check transfer mechanisms

Case Study 2a: Blog Migration A backup of UK Web Focus blog is available on Vox: Manual migration of new posts every few weeks Only migrates text Doesn’t migrate images, embedded videos, internal links, comments, … Web 2.0 Migration of blogs, wikis, etc. is not currently an easy task  But advice is available

Case Study 2b: The Individual’s Blog (1) Auricle blog: Launched Jan 2004 by head of e-learning team, Bath High profile & public visibility by early adopter & evangelist Today: It’s gone Lost after evangelist left, new staff arrive, new priorities, … Thoughts?

Case Study 2b: The Individual’s Blog (2) Auricle reborn: Further Google revealed the blog has been reborn New domain (www.auricle.org/) New engine (Wordpress) & look and feel (but old engine still available) New content being added Old content still accessible Thoughts?

Case Study 3: Reusing Data Blog post in Facebook. Possible concerns: It’s not sustainable You’ve given ownership to Facebook Web 2.0 Response: The post is managed in WordPress; Fb displays copy (to new audience) Fb don’t claim ownership – they claim rights to make money (e.g. through ads)

Case Study 4: Disposable Data Twitter – example of a micro-blogging application Facebook status messages is another related example Web 2.0 Issues: Will Twitter be sustain-able over a long period? What will happen to the data? What about the IPR for ‘tweets’? What about institutional uses?

Case Study 4: Disposable Data Many twitterers regard their tweets as disposal I tend to use Twitter as a ‘virtual water cooler’ – sharing gossip, jokes and occasional work-related information with (mainly) people I know Web 2.0 You could make use of clients which manage your tweets (e.g. treat like email) But you should develop your policies first, prior to exploring technologies

Case Study 4: Disposable Data Skype (or your preferred VoIP application) are growing in popularity Web 2.0 Issues: Is the digital data (the call) preserved? What about the video and the IM chats? Possible Responses: Am I bovvered? I didn’t bother with analogue phones, why should I worry now?

Case Study 5: Digitized Talks Seminar on Open Science given at UKOLN in Feb 2008. Video clip of opening 10 mins taken & uploaded to YouTube Issues: Privacy Quality Benefits Long term access Benefits identified – now how do we seek to deploy recordings of seminars, conferences, etc. on a more systematic basis? This is work in progress – but see IWMW 2007/8 videos

Case Study 6: Slideshare What happens to your slides if Slideshare disappears? My approach: Master copy held on managed environment Info on master on title slide and metadata CC licence & download available – many copies

Case Study 7 – Video Tools Requirement: Provide brief video clips for colleagues running workshop Initial idea – use Seesmic video micro-blogging service (can include video responses) But: No video export function (yet) Accessibility of responses Approach taken: Create video locally Upload video to YouTube (to allow textual comments) Link to managed master file Seesmic and YouTube Web sites and Twirl client are access tools; the data is managed elsewhere

Case Study 8: Social Networks University of Wales, Newport and University of Bradford have set up Ning networks for supporting their students: Bradford: Aimed at students during their first term at University Newport: Open Intended for students about to arrive at institution What does preservation mean in this context? Answers to this question will be left as an exercise for the participants  http://newstudents.newport.ac.uk/

What Do We Do For SNs? The Open University has a presence in Facebook. On 9 Sep 2008: 9,785 fans 1,233 wall posts 138 discussion topics Is anyone: Recording the history? Curating the data Managing possible risks? Web 2.0

Role Of The Internet Archive Can we leave everything to the Internet Archive (IA)? Has role to play in Web 1.0 Seems to archive some public blogs May not access images or other embedded content Still has limitations (cf. UCE/BCU) Can’t access, e.g., Facebook pages Web 2.0 IA is a 3 rd party Web 2.0 service

The Research Challenges Some thoughts: Preservation of Web sites in known to be difficult Additional difficulties in a Web 2.0 world Complexities include technical challenges and business issues However: Is avoiding Web 2.0 a realistic answer? There may be some simple processes which may help Web 2.0

Accessibility & Preservation The parallels: We can’t release xxx: it breaks accessibility guidelines; we’ll be sued The xxx service provides benefits to many – we’ll see what reasonable adjustments are needed to enhance access Approaches needed: Clarification of the purpose of the service Risk assessment of loss of service / record of service / record of look-and-feel Documented policy

Conclusions To conclude: Web 2.0 services won’t go away Innovation in departments won’t stop Motivated & dedicated professional can help in preservation But this can’t be guaranteed Need for individual / departmental audits for asset management strategies when outside agencies involved? But maybe we don’t need to preserve stuff Need for education on when stuff may be transient and disposable

Web Preservation in a Web 2.0 Environment (Brian Kelly, UKOLN)

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (8)

Similar to Web Preservation in a Web 2.0 Environment (Brian Kelly, UKOLN)

Similar to Web Preservation in a Web 2.0 Environment (Brian Kelly, UKOLN) (20)

More from jiscpowr

More from jiscpowr (10)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Web Preservation in a Web 2.0 Environment (Brian Kelly, UKOLN)