 So the first up will be Katrina Scofield and she's from Edinburgh Napier University and the title of Katrina's talk is how digital technology can help literary heritage sites about the feeling of reading and she's going to explore how digital technology might transform literary heritage sites and why the digital is particularly suited to literary heritage sites despite its currently sparse usage. So if I could just invite Katrina to come on camera now, would be lovely to hear from you. Over to you Katrina, thank you. So yeah, I'm Katrina. I'm a young white woman with brown hair and I'm wearing a blue top and glasses today. So I'm currently doing a collaborative PhD in Edinburgh looking at the way that digital technology can create new opportunities for literary heritage sites. So accordingly today I'll be suggesting where digital technology can fit into literary heritage sites and how it can be used to create new opportunities to explore literature and reading itself. For the purpose of keeping the speedwalk speedy, I'm going to be focusing on British sites but in my research I am looking at fashion too. Literary heritage sites in Britain today currently don't tend to use digital technology. Although there is innovation, there is definitely a standard form of literary heritage sites tape which is exemplified by the Writers House Museum approach, like the examples you see picture on the screen which include Abbotsford and the Bronte Passage Museum. Writers House Museums are authentic feeling heritage sites recreated as it was when the author, who's generally now dead, lived there. So they give visitors a sense of stepping into the past. They're also really focused on these authors taking the form of a museum that is dedicated to the writer and their associates and organize around objects that these people used and own. And I would argue that the kind of crowning jewel object is impact the house itself. This focus on material things means that the matter of the writer's work itself, which is more intangible is generally actually sidelined in these literary heritage sites. This Writers House Museum approach is tried and tested. Alison Booth writes that it was fully established during the 19th century on her book about the history of literary tourism. However, the reading public has changed in the last 200 years. And while these sites appeal to those already interested in literature or heritage more generally, they don't really bring in new audiences. Additionally, they're focused on the author leaves little space for stories and literature itself. They don't really encourage reading, like that's a big generalization. I think it can be argued. And whilst they offer some of the same imaginative escapism as reading through that kind of stepping into the past field, it's only within the house itself. So their escapism is limited to domestic settings from the past, not necessarily the best world to escape into. The reason that so many literary heritage sites stick to these kind of tried and tested forms is because there's a real investment in authenticity, which often brown and file describe as the reality of the places the visitor imagined it. A literary heritage site is expected to evoke the past, which is conjured through the presentation of authentic objects or the building appearing period accurate. However, scholars like Booth and David Herbert point out that the very active creating a satisfactory heritage site is inauthentic, which can be illustrated by the Dickens Museum in London, which's been remodeled several times to adhere to a general image of Victorian England, rather than depict the building as it actually was when Dickens lived there, which has been commented on as being not Victorian enough. So authenticity in the two heritage sites isn't really about reproducing the real past, instead of evoking an accurate feeling feeling of it. This isn't a criticism of the two heritage sites, but it is a statement of fact. And indeed this kind of inauthentic approach actually I think suits literature where to paraphrase Mike Robinson reality is distorted. Through fiction or imperfect retellings of real events. Meanwhile, the digital and digital technology has been long kept out of the heritage sites because it is seen as inauthentic. This is pretty understandable. I mean, like a touch screen in a period of room is going to be instantly modernizing and take you out of that sense of step into the past. However, if we uncouple the association between literary heritage sites and this need to create an authentic sense of the past, we can start asking what the digital could do. And I think it's particularly suited to exploring and interpreting literature itself. Digital object work has made it clear that heritage doesn't have to be strictly material. Julia Farmers writes that museum collections are now understood as informational rather than physical. Heritage sites have become custodians of information and providers of interpretation first and foremost, but another way they have become storytellers. Meanwhile, literary heritage is at its core immaterial. There are thousands of copies of any given book, but that doesn't make an individual in cancer with one any less impactful or personal works or doesn't depend on its addition. Literature and digital therefore share mutual intangibility. So whilst the digital may disrupt the traditional orthophagist approach of literary heritage sites, I do think it's uniquely able to capture the appeal of reading when employed in creative and interesting ways. Before I answer the question on this slide, what does the digital offer? I want to note that there's a lot of forms that digital technology can take, and they don't have to be intrusive or visual. Think for instance of audio guides or even just ambient audio which can really kind of transform the space. Anyway, obviously I have limited time so I'm not going to get into that. But I will summarize I think some of the main benefits with digital cambering and literary heritage sites. The digital is informative. One screen can hold many times the amount and types of interpretation of a label the same size and give the visitor a choice of Padstreet's book. Pitch it on the slide, it is a display in the Elizabeth Gospel house in Manchester. It's a touch screen which featured scanned images of a short story in multiple forms from Gaspers manuscript through to its published edition. This allows people to engage with the story both as an object and to sit down and actually read it. In greater detail than usually would be facilitated by literary heritage sites where things are kept behind glass and you're encouraged to keep moving through the space. The digital was adaptable. New information can be integrated into display regularly and by updating the kind of database behind the scenes. Without needing to create whole new displays which reflects an ever changing literary scene, allowing living authors and underrepresented authors to really get their view. And finally, and perhaps this is the most prominent benefit of the digital, it's imaginative, fun, creative and artistic displays can evoke the past or let you step into a fantasy something entirely new. Bringing the scaper's choice of reading into a real physical space. Again, the example on the slide from the British libraries Paddington exhibition, allowed you to sit down with Paddington there and watch directors play out around you, which gives visitors a real sense of the tone and the fun of the books, but it's engaging whether you've read them or not. It's rewarding if you've read them you can recognize the various members of the family and it's exciting if you haven't read them encourage you need to go out and explore the stories. So this has been a really quick summary and in fact there's like quite limited examples to call for him in literary heritage sites moment because the digital is currently really at its edges. However, hopefully we'll see it more over the next two years. And that my presentation has given you a sense of the possibilities and the validity of using digital technology at literary heritage sites. Thank you. Here's my email and my Twitter and a few sources like water, if you want to go out and read more. That's great. Thanks very much to Trina. That was absolutely brilliant and well timed. Thanks. Right well we'll be coming back to you I'm sure with some some questions later on. And we've better how on with our next speaker next presentation. My screens are overlapping here. Right so next up, we have no Dan Atalan. And she's joined by her colleague who we're presenting but will be available also to respond to questions Valeria Vitale. I'm from the British Institute at Ankara Valerius from the Alan During Institute. And no doubt we'll be talking to us about the British International Research Institute collaboration. The British International Research Institute so global research partners in the arts, humanities and social sciences. Their main goal is to create and highlight connections among different collections held in different institutions in order to enrich the search quality. Hello, today I would like to present the coordination project. I would also like to thank the conference organizers and attendees. Today I will give you permission for mention about British International Research Institute and our project to create guidelines and templates for 8B to combine the catalog records. One of the important thing is to share our know how the British International Research Institute are global research partners in the arts, humanities and social sciences. Discovering new knowledge, promoting cultural heritage and supporting international engagement. The British are collaborating among themselves and with these cultural member institutions to share experiences and best practice around the creation, management and promotion of digital collections. The main goal is to create highlight connections among different collections held in different institutions in order to enrich research quality. This presentation will give examples of how the British can collaborate and create digital archives, collections and linked open data. The British International Research Institute, BIRIS, RBSA, BSR, BIS, CBRR, BIPS, BC, SLS, RAC institutes are working for different regions including Italy, Greece, Turkey and Black Sea, Levant, Libya, Iran, Europe. Some of the institutes have archives and collections more than 100 years, some of them already digitized their collections and publishing them online. However, some of them starting to digitize their collections. The ideas shared know how and our practices between those institutes in the different regions will same time and effort. This joint project shaped two years ago and started to organize meetings together. Now we will start from the SLS and Society for Libyan Studies have online collections and will give full about how to share our practices about gazette. SLS founded in 1969 and working for Libya region. They created the gazette online archive with place names. The settlement names are important for linking archival material. So SLS has experienced about placing place names and gazettes for Libya region. Very technical at Rome, working for Italy region. Online collections are available via BCR web page. BSR used Excel for various projects and collections as a viable approach to pre-catalogy. Out of this space may seem sometimes laborious and time-consuming. In the long run, it turns out to be great help when it comes to understand collection from a broader point of view. In this project, BCR is also sharing experiences about pre-catalogy and processing about data ingestion. The CSP format can be inputted easily in any cataloging or metadata system as it is considered in the Lingua Franca for exchanging data between different applications and databases. It is to collect items working for Greece region and has online collections. The essay example seen in this slide shows the photography from Turkey as experienced with archival collections, especially for museum objects. Sharing know-how related to digital processing processes is important. The essay is also sharing experience about team management and data verification processes for digital collection. BIA, British Institute of Time, have been working for Turkey and Black Sea region. Digital repository system created as islanderite system chosen. Open access digital repository system will be open to public soon. The BIA digital repository system has taxonomy behind the system that also has linking data and authority records. So BIA is sharing experience about authority records and terminology showing place names for Turkey region. CBR is partner of MADIC project, so MADIC digital mapping digital cultural heritage in Jordan project. British Institute of Eastern African Major Archive is available via Arctology Data Service repository. So some kind of, at some point, ADS will be given advice for this project. So far unearthed, far more connectivity than expected between people and places across time as well as collections. In this slide you will see the statistical at-home examples, e.g. urgent and civil service strong. As the first female student at the BSA in 1891, then became librarian and assistant director at BSA, 1909, 1925. Lady Alvin Brogan started BCR faculty of Archaeology, History and Methods secretary, then was deeply involved with SSS. So this picture shows the relation between places, person and institute. Each institute has some kind of connections and relations. BIA, Joyce Rayners, 1918, has worked in Libya, Italy and Turkey. Institutes started to share their data set for people and places in the beginning with this project linked open data set for person and places will be discussed and how are we going to create joint data set for different regions. BIA is partner for CEDA project and associate partner of ARIA and NEPLAS. Translated to verify guidelines into Turkish to increase the knowledge and awareness about where for archaeological data in Turkey. Creating network and sharing know how is important for digital creation processes. So each institute has several experience about digitalization and digital creation processes. Some institutes are also partners of international projects, institutes can learn from each other and can save time and effort. Those we have same people and same place information so data sets creation for people and settlements will be important so we don't need to create same information again and again. It is self-evident that building a community where both knowledge of the collections and technical expertise is shared and creating regional union of our collections will create an unrivaled digital gateway. Such is the pioneering impact of the work of these archaeologists and so meticulous their observation and assembly of a documentary and photography court. These resources are internationally important. We have very limited time and we can learn from each other. So our aim is to talk the same language with using same standards and same vocabularies with different language. So we want to create workflows and guidelines. We want to work together and then we want to create a link to open data set for person and place. Thank you very much for your attention. Thank you very much. Really good and lightning. Yes, demonstration of good collaboration. Thank you. Right, we'll carry on. We'll go to our third talk now. Next up we have Maya Dodd who's from Flame University in India and Maya received her PhD from Stanford University and subsequent postdoctoral fellowships at the committee for South Asian studies at Princeton University and at the centre of the law and governance in JNU India. That's right Maya. Yes, Maya is going to be the title of her talk is What's Missing in Humanities and Critical Infrastructure in India. So I will hand over to you Maya and I will fight myself. Thank you Neil. Thank you. I hope everything is visible. Okay. Yes, it is. Yes. Just to describe myself. I'm a 40 something brown woman of South Asian descent wearing earrings and have my hair pulled back. Currently I'm speaking from Pune in Western India and it's raining pretty heavily here. So where I locate my question comes also from where I'm situated. Just because it's supposed to be a speedy presentation I want to put at the very front the question I'm asking, which is that I located, I locate the sort of querying around digitized collections to the point of how we narrate archives and contemporary terms for individuals and for institutions. Sorry. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. So I, you know, I'm just going to sorry minimize myself. Yeah, thank you. So, you know, the term digital humanities has come to me in many things but the point that this talk will make is that a lot of very interesting work is happening with digital humanities outside of, you know, higher educational institutions and actually even outside of institutions all together. And there is something, you know, that the conversation about the digital divide occludes, which is that there is this sort of explosion of expressiveness, taking place in many, many registers. And I think the point now is to look at those registers to see what comes out of the creation of these smaller voices, smaller archival efforts, and also in terms of these registers of contemporary archiving. So very simply put, you know, digital humanities in India is very different from the university spaces of its practice in the global north. There there's the imagination of a digital humanities laboratory, many tools, many resources, whereas in the Indian sort of site. There are many practices on the ground, even if the university system in some senses is not really the site of that activity. To understand that India is the youngest country in the world poised it seems that becoming the world's largest by next year is to really wonder at what the digital means for this population. Since 20 universities at the time of independence today the total count is about 1000. And I mentioned this because higher education is linked to the idea of aspiration and capacity. The numbers I mentioned are to indicate that obviously this university system is far from adequate to capturing aspiration and expression. And this is why we need to look at sort of what exists outside of these institutional spaces that are the sanctioned spaces of knowledge making and archival creation. Yeah, so this is a slide and I know I'm supposed to be speedy so this is a very quick snapshot at all kinds of efforts that have existed in terms of digitizing archival data and collections. And obviously there have been initially government sort of sanctioned projects where government institutions digitize their holdings. And in the meantime, you also see the rise now of crowdsourced and sort of other private players in the space. Now I want to sort of mention that the computational tradition in the sense is going back to two big historical projects. One was Project Madurai, which was a digitized collection of ancient Tamil classics. And the other was Bijitra, which was a digital verodium of Ravindranath Tagore's works. Now the thing is since then it's surprising that there have been very few digital humanities or digitized projects coming out of these institutional spaces. I mentioned of course the National Digital Library of India, NDLI, the Digital Archive of the National Archives of India, Abhilik Patal, and other digital databases like Ideas of India as notable exceptions. But actually it's the absence of these infrastructures, which challenges how sort of these other sort of spaces have given rise to some answers. And had we a project like the Australian one Trove where crowdsourcing and participation were encouraged in a Wikipedia sort of format, perhaps they would be a very different story. But in any case, the point here is not that this is exhaustive of the imagination of how people are narrating historical memory. And I'm listing here, because I'm supposed to be quick, just the names of some of these efforts which I really invite folks to take a look at. And they range from sort of literally the small, the medium and the large, nothing quite on the scale or the sort of the corpus of resource that Bichitra or even other government sort of initiatives might have had. But in any case, literally a single individual, certain collectives have managed to sort of draw attention on the things they deem important. So if you look at, for instance, you know, a camera which is a queer archive coming out of a lawyer's collective that was sort of, you know, amassing this material when you maybe this has now made its way to the National Law School Library in Bangalore. And what I was sort of mentioning in this case is that, yes, there is the question of what happens to some of these digital archives after individuals have moved on or after, you know, we need new custodians. So in some sense, as many of these are taking place outside of the university or governmental infrastructures. These experiments are altering the way in which we understand who's documenting, who is this for, and the overall sort of understanding of publication and access to knowledge. So in classrooms in India, some of us are, you know, experiencing the power of this in terms of multiplying access. And we're also witnessing the rise of crowdsourcing and pure enabled creation, which in a way is complicating the idea of authority. So some of these sort of stories we collected in this book, which is now two or three years old, but in fact, at that point there was still a focus on what our institutions doing and post I think over and the rise of so many new voices. The recognition is that there is a lot of exciting activity happening, of course, you know, in terms of social media and other sort of handles, but really in terms of quiet or private efforts. And, sort of, you know, create these resources. So this anthology explored the turn to digital across institutions such as the National Museum and things like even a short archive. But the next sort of reflection I invite, I think, or many of us to look at is the dilemma which is on the one hand we see, you know, individual efforts to doing this or, you know, private efforts to doing this, but really how do we amplify those. So this is not a question of infrastructure, where the amplification would mean that more digital archives can serve their publics. This is, you know, what I sort of list very quickly as what might be possible what can be done. And of course some of us in universities are attempting to push this through digital humanities courses, but really it is the classic, you know, public private partnership model that I imagine would take the story forward, which is that you need to do something, but then you also need some amount of heavy lifting to amplify and to sort of build infrastructure to actually sort of get word out there in terms of the wonderful work done by so many in terms of generating this work and cataloging it. And more importantly, as somebody mentioned earlier, the point really with all of this is to tell new stories, and to sort of not just tell dominant stories. In that sense the multilingual sort of subscript to many of this is critical and that is something the digital makes uniquely possible, where, you know, we are able now to perhaps render this in a multi channel fashion. That was not always the story with traditional archiving. So I will end here and I hopefully have not exceeded my time. Thank you. If you have any questions, this is my Twitter handle. And that's my thanks. Thank you so much. Finally timed. Yeah, very interesting to hear about just the scale. I heard you mentioned 1000 universities in India. Hopefully short though. Hopefully short of meeting the demographic need. We think we have a complicated landscape here in the UK with 165 universities but we might return to that idea scale at the end and questions that would be interested in more about that. But thank you so much. That was great. Very interesting. I'll now press on to the fourth and last of our speed presentations. Next up we have Curlie and she's from the Renmin University of China. And Curlie is going to be talking to us about artificial intelligence and archives management. So AI has been the mainstream in recent 10 years. And so Curlie is going to propose how the archive is applying artificial intelligence work from a layer of mind resource and technology and so yes, I'll be quiet now and hand over to you Curlie thank you very much. Thank you. Hi everyone my name is Curlie. I'm a Chinese girl with a black hair, green shirt, green glasses, and I'm coming from Renmin University of China and a second year PhD candidate. And today I'm really happy to see you guys and I'm going to talk about artificial intelligence and archives management. First I want to introduce some of the general situation of artificial intelligence in China. You know in 2017 the State Council has issued a new generation of artificial intelligence development plan. And the last year the China Internet Society of China has released the China Internet report. And it was clear that AI industry has reached over 300 billion RMB. And I want to mention that it's a World Artificial Intelligence Conference and we held it every year starting from 2018. And we gathered a lot of scientists and entrepreneurs to make some communication with each other and talk about some issues or some future work in field of AI and to build a platform for them to communicate. And why we need to apply AI in archives management? The one thing is that the digital and born digital records are increasing and other things is that archives management is expected to be intelligent, personalized, and knowledge based. You know last year on our national archive so next five strategy plan and we make a lot of goals. And one of the goals is that the new generation of information technology is more widely used in archive work. And I had made a review based on CNKI which is the biggest Chinese periodical database. And we can find that since 2017 and our archive community has began to focus on the AI and archives work. And as for the content, we divided it into two parts and one aspect is theoretical consideration and the second one is specific solutions. And for some certain archives management. And our National Archives Administration has supported a lot of projects every year for them to make cooperation between university and entrepreneurs. And here are some projects related to AI and archives work. And then here I want to show two interesting case and one case is that the Taiwan Digital History Library and this is a typical line to date of Taiwan. And they provide the toolkit to public and using AI technology to identify and extract the information like date, price, and name of seller buyer to and make them relationship to other documentations for the user to make them more better understand for the content. And as a case is a Chinese AI company and he make a lot of work like intelligence, visual analysis, image recognitions, and they also do a lot of work like oral history project to build a corpus like this. And by comparing the debates and the practice between China and the foreign countries, I find that is totally different. And using the records continuum model proposed by Franka Boyd and we can find that the discussion in foreign countries like the UK or USA involves a full life cycle of records comparing all four dimensions, but in China it's mainly to talk about how to use AI technology to develop the historical archive resources. So it's different stage. And I pull forward six directions. And I want to mention the intelligence searching in China where our archival always provides the ritual items such as title, author, and the field numbers to for them to search what they want to need. And but it's really hard for them to to find something when the user didn't have a clear purpose. So we need to use AI technologies to help them to find what they need and get the direct answers. And how to apply AI in archives work. I think we have a lot of work to do from mind resource and technology. You know, for some people it's really hard to accept AI because they didn't trust them. And the the the resource digitalization is very hard and the financial and human cost is very high. So we need to do a lot for them to use the AI technologies in archives work. So that's all I want to share. And if you are interested or you have some questions you can email me. Thank you. Great. Thank you very much. Fascinating, quick glimpse at the area of work that you're looking at there. So that's all of the sessions or the presentations in this session that we've gone through now. Please do put any questions, any thoughts or even comments that reflections that occur to you listening to any of that in the Q&A. We'd love to hear from you. Can I invite all of our speakers now to turn their cameras back on so we'll get together as a panel. We've got some little bit more time in this session to reflect on what we've just seen and heard. So thank you once again to all of you and welcome Melaria on screen. This colleague of Nerdans as I mentioned earlier. So we will no questions coming in at the moment. But perhaps people are still thinking and considering. I was reflecting on all of your presentations and they seem to me to be kind of, well, firstly, we're very international bunch. And that's really good and reflective. I think of the aspirations of DCDC as a conference in order to try and work internationally and collaborate. But it's that theme of collaboration came through quite strongly for me in aspects of all of your talks, I think. I guess really the first thing to perhaps put to all of you would be on that theme of collaboration, either explicitly with your talk, Nerdana, across all of the BIRIs. But also with you, Maya, in terms of the scale of your work in India, Katrina collaboration between cultural heritage and movie technology providers. And again, collaboration perhaps with AI experts and the applications to archives and maybe archives working together. Question to all of you, what single thing would make your lives easier in terms of being able to collaborate more effectively? Anybody want to come in on that? Yeah, I'll go in first. Yeah, no, I think because, you know, I'm interested in the question of how we can amplify and build more capacity. And for that, you know, discoverability is extremely important. There isn't a single platform of any variety that allows that to happen. And I'm talking about sort of small archives and, you know, sort of all kinds of actors and that, but also sort of the linked data, you know, that we need for things to talk to each other. If it resided in a platform that enabled discoverability, I think it would go a long way for people to understand what else is happening elsewhere and how to find it. Yeah. Yes, well, very appropriate for the DCDC theme as well. Thank you very much for picking up on that, but yeah, discoverability is extremely important across collections. Anybody else want to come in with thoughts on the one thing that would make their lives easier in terms of collaboration? I think communication and increased knowledge between all kinds of specialists and directors and the library managers and administrator level, because sometimes it is very technical. We are speaking very technical to open those collections and everything, but it's very difficult to explain to other people what we need. So the communication is important. And so we are talking about linked open data as a technical level, but what is this linked open data? Why we need it? Because so in Turkey, for example, lots of libraries, archives and museums are struggling with this sharing collections and creating standards or applying this standard. So I think it is important to communicate each other with all levels while we are doing this collaborative activities. Yeah, thanks for that. Communication is between different groups doing different things. It's absolutely key. Okay, I can go on to some questions from our audience now. There's some appeared in Q&A box. So let me start with a question to you Katrina by me. What does the balance between fictionality and authenticity in the discussed heritage sites? Do you think digital can help to signal that level of authenticity that might otherwise be lost when tweaking the exhibits towards public perception or public expectation? Yeah, I do. I think if the feeling of the digital remains that is implicitly inauthentic, I think that in itself is almost like a form of authenticity. If that's all you're asking, as I understand the question, having the digital there plays into the fictionality of the space, which then allows the fictionality of the stories to be given a much more prominent role. I also think that specific types of technology do really have the capacity to signal a more authentic connection to the past because they don't have to rely on physical objects. So I'm thinking, for instance, like the capacity to reconstruct places through time as they existed. So like obviously heritage sites as they exist have to pick a period to focus on and recreate, but the capacity of digital is a model of different periods that allows it to gesture so how a site changes over time, which is surely kind of an equally accurate representation of how it exists and has existed. Kind of changes slowly over ongoing similarity, ongoing consistent factor through time. Yeah. Thank you. Yes. Yes, no reflections. So, there is another question before you, Trina, but I guess somebody else first may come back to you, if I may. So, a question from my colleague Peter Finley to Maya. So, Maya, could you suggest what kind of infrastructure might help to achieve some level of long term sustainability for projects. The ideas on the reflections on that. You know, I think we forget that the digital is a femoral often, and it feels like, you know, if there's a website up, it should be there for all time but the truth is that it requires and I know for instance internet archive or other such sort of for a do web scraping and there is some kind of preservation that is ongoing, but really I think it is that if one lone soldier has started an effort and sort of on their own dime, keep something going for a bit. The expectation that that will be enough or that will continue forever or something is what I think we need to be cautious against. So, when I say long term sustainability, I think there is a model of adoption. And I'm not sure exactly. I mean this is a tough one because it's a funding question really. I think we are getting used to being disappointed by not having big funding in India for humanities projects. So we don't really have that kind of a, you know, melon foundation and national endowment for the humanities kind of money. That can be tapped into to do that kind of work, but there really does need to be thought on the digital preservation and also the sort of subsequent adoption of these efforts. I wish I had a more robust answer. But one of the reasons I did not actually mention many voices in the social media space is because they're even more ephemeral, like at least with some sort of digital archival creations. There is a sort of eye to the longer term, but with very, very, what do you say, viral social media handles also, and they create a lot of buzz and there's a lot of interest around those handles. The fact is that, you know, they could be shut down tomorrow. They could be, you know, completely disappeared. And so I think I'm sort of focused on the question of digital archiving from a semi institutional point of view at least, I'm aware of the fact that the answer is not in terms of state funding. Now, what is that third space I wish I knew, but yeah, something needs to be thought through. Yeah. Thank you for that. Thank you. Yes. I just occurred to me was to be talking and you mentioned crowdsourcing and crowdsourcing, presumably has opportunities at a scale of India that you were talking about that perhaps aren't available to people working elsewhere. I don't know, but it's intriguing in terms of that scale you're talking about. Anyway, thank you. Yeah. There's another question if you might have in the Q&A but I'll put one to kill you, if I may, and maybe come back to you. Kill you. The question here. Could you, could you give us some specific examples of how AI has been successfully or unsuccessfully used in archival work. I don't know, I feel the technology is often related to hype and expectations and doesn't always deliver on the hopes and expectations promised. So that's an interesting view she has been added there but do you have any examples you might be able to give us. Okay, thank you. And as I mentioned before, in China, a lot of national archives always use the AI technologies to identify, use the QR code to identify and extract the Chinese character. So it's really hard for the activists to recognize. So it's really helpful. But AI technology is not widely expected to public. It has a lot of reasons. You know, in China, in national situation, we have a lot of archivists with archival science degree and we don't have too much technology skills. So they don't want to, when we use the AI technology in archival work, maybe they think they have, they didn't have too much advantages. They will replace the by AI technology. So it's very hard for us to accept. And I think AI technology is a trade for archival work, but we need to do a lot of things to tackle some problems. For example, like, like some mind, like a user, because the user thinks that you use the AI technology and my data privacy will be destroyed and my data of my personality is stolen by others and used by others. So we have a lot to do. Thank you. Yes, just kind of handling expectations and ideas of threat and concern is a job in itself. Yeah, I did notice clearly that that list of projects you put up, some of them were dated and some of those later projects were going all the way out to 2027. So presumably quite big substantial pieces of work going on there. I mean, in terms of, is it easy for our guys to get funding and find collaborations in this area? Actually, we can get some funding for the National Archival Administration because, you know, as far as my mention before, we have put forward our next five years strategies. So we really put more attention and money on it so we can take some collaborations with the university teachers or some interpreters to get more communication and to find some solutions for AI in archival work. Okay, thanks for that. I'm going to go back to Katrina again if I may. This is another question for Katrina. Do you expect to see any of these literary spaces you've looked at taken into the digital space in the near future and which one would you most want to see digitized? Okay, yeah. So definitely it needs to be acknowledged that that's already beginning to happen. So even like kind of the example says in the presentation, the Charles Dickens Museum in London is kind of already visible on their website in like a Google Arts kind of way where you like move through it as you would on street view. So you can kind of virtually visit the museum. And then the Alison Wonderland exhibition at the V&A had like a VR component to it. So it was a VR game, you need the headset and everything, which you could play as part of the exhibition, but you actually could also download at home. And what that was was it kind of took you through a virtual like cartoonized version of the V&A building, which is populated by various characters from Alison Wonderland. So it was rooted in the V&A but took this much more creative approach and really kind of engaged with the story itself, which I think is like really interesting in terms of the sites I would love to see digitized. I think that the Bronte Passage as it is isn't doing stuff with digital stuff so much but has a really, really interesting art program. And I'd be interested to see how they could kind of use digital art and extend that so it isn't simply a case like at the V&A. I think it isn't just kind of digitizing the space, but it is in fact kind of taking that a step further. I think the artwork stuff they do at the Bronte Passage is really interesting in terms of interpretation because it kind of does play with like different interpretations and opinions. And so I think that they would be able to do something really interesting with that digitization and if the right things came together. Okay, that sounds intriguing. I wonder if they're here at the DCDC conference. Maybe they're listening to that and giving you some ideas. Yes, and my kids have obviously been based here in London, they've went on school trips to the Dickens Museum, so yeah, possibilities there. Thank you, yes. Back to Meier again, another question for you. We've got about seven minutes left, so time for a couple more questions. You mentioned public-private partnerships as a way of facilitating creation and non-gevity of smaller community-based archives. Does this assume a commercial product coming from the academic sector? This is the norm for us as a consumer, oh sorry, yeah, the person is saying they're from the academic sector so they're assuming it would be a commercial product. Is there tension here between the interests of partners, the private and the community from which the material came in terms of post-digital access and how might this be resolved? Yeah, so I wish I had a way to sort of not make this point so bold. But the truth is that we're really, really short on resource, even in the university system. So even a product like Guilds Engage, most universities can't afford. And so in one sense, our default go-to anyway is open source, open access. And I don't mean everything has to be pro bono because somebody is bearing the cost, no doubt. But yeah, when we say public-private, what I think we mean also is that heritage often can be perceived as a public good and you can't really privatize that. But you might need private investment to kind of make that heritage whatever format, right, more public. That being said, I'm also aware of very troubled histories and exploitative relationships often that have marked that. So there is no doubt the awareness of differential access. And I don't mean that in terms of a paid model of who can afford and who can't afford, but really in terms of how far people wish to participate. So there are sort of two things which Flankin, one is sort of the need for much more open access and open source. But there's also the recognition that it should be on the terms that people wish to participate with it. So it sounds a little abstract maybe, but yeah, but I think we're still figuring these models out. And one is of course the people go where the money is and there is a lot more private money in India than they used to be. So we're living at that point that inflection point where state support is no longer the thing to look at. But of course, private money comes with terms and conditions. So I think many countries are sort of figuring this out at the same time. Yeah. Yes, thanks for that. It's a nuanced answer. I'd like to put a question to Nurdan and Valerio, if I may. And since I was very struck by all of the different ways that your institutions are collaborating together. You talked about vocabularies and infrastructure and language and workflows. And the link-open data that you're working towards as well. I would imagine that's an absolutely key part of your strategy going forward in terms of your collaboration. How would you characterize your progress in that area of link-open data? Is that quite a mature activity that you've got going there? Have you got a long way to go yet? Do you want me to answer that? Shall I start? Well, thank you for the question. It is a key component. And about the question that you asked before, what would make your life easier? I think that using standards would be my first bullet point on the list. And I think the link-open data, it's a great choice for a standard that can be understood by a number of applications, a number of infrastructures. It's not software specific. Because all the British research institutes, international researchers are so different and they are at such a different stages in their digitization process and opening up processes. I think that the idea of investing in link-open data was really a key, a key was really a way, an experiment in linking things that are different, but that can talk to each other. I don't know if you've done ones to add anything to that. I agree with Valeria, because we have different institutes in different regions. So we have some kind of materials, but we have different types of places, different names of places and with Turkish, Arabic and other languages. So we have so many differences between. So if we can create a link-open data infrastructure between these institutes, so it will be a way to communicate and talk to each other. So we don't need to create the same. Because we have also shared archives or one person located, many archives in different places. So we have same photographs, same kind of photographs from same places, etc. So it's important to create this link-open data infrastructure for us. So in terms of its maturity, how would you characterize it? What progress have you made and how far have you got to go in that area? Well, it depends because each of the institutes has a different, let's say, stage of maturity. So there are some of them that are really quite ready to go and some others that will definitely take some time. And the project presented is actually a scoping project at the moment. Just to clarify what we need, what are the strategic steps that we need to take to have all of them be part of it? Because if we had only considered those institutes like the one in Turkey and a few others that are really advanced, we could be ready to go now. But because we wanted all the institutes to be part of it, so that we do it only once and not many times, we combined these efforts with some sort of leveling up of the various institutes, which I think is going to pay off in the long term. Sure, yeah. Okay, thanks very much. It's very interesting. So we're at 11 o'clock, but there's nothing coming straight after this and we've got one more question in the Q&A. So if you're prepared to stay on for a little too longer, it's actually to collude again if I may. So A.I. is a question from Eileen Makayla Young. A.I. technology is unknown to be inherently biased, so is it possible to offset these biases? It's a big question to end on, but perhaps you may have some thoughts on that. Yeah, thank you for the question. And I think that A.I. technology will cost a lot of digital divided. And the information gap between, you know, like the young and the old. So the gap is going to get bigger and bigger. So I think it cannot, the bias cannot disappear. So what do we do is that to help understand the needs of the vulnerable people and to bring the gap and create some rules to protect their rights. So, but I think that the bias cannot disappear because it is determined by technology itself. Yeah, thank you.