 So I'll be introducing our first speaker now who is Caroline Catchpole from the National Archives. Caroline is digital development officer and she provides support for and guidance for archives on a number of digital topics including cataloging and providing access to collections via Discovery which is of course the National Archives major platform for archival descriptions which contains about 33 million records. To talk to you today about money for collections it's important to understand the context of where we've come from. In 1869 the Historic Manuscripts Commission was formed to document the location of records of papers in private hands as opposed to those held at the Public Record Office. The work of the commission raised awareness of the importance of privately owned material for a more complete picture of the nation's archival heritage and history. In 1945 HNC's activities were expanded and the National Register of Archives was lost. The register helped to produce a more comprehensive census of the nation's archive with information about private collections initially fed in by voluntary local committees and then increasingly by the emerging network of archives services. In 1995 the NRA indexes were made available online. The index is that into person, family, business, organisation and diary lists where archival collections relating to the record creators can be found. They are available today for research on Discovery. In the early 2000s a network project called Access to Archives was launched and collaborated with archives across the country that archive catalogs online. These sat on a separate website until 2015 when they were moved into Discovery which then became a comprehensive search portal for UK archives encompassing both the A to B catalog and the NRA indexing. The NRA is an invaluable research resource but not without its annotations. It has been curated over the last 66 years and built on data collected up to 150 years ago. There are 52,403 people represented in the NRA as record creators and over 47,000 of these are 90% are men. Similarly in Wikipedia, rates of biographies of women are far below what they should be which is 17% of the biographies about women in 2017. We can't begin to accurately tell the history of our nation through records that are so overwhelmingly maldominated. We record titles in the NRA and use the term epithet to represent a person's profession or what they were best known for in their lifetime. A cursory glance at this data reveals how skewed the representation is in the NRA is towards elite white men reinforcing a very narrow bias view of the preceding centuries of UK history and creating archival silences. This background gives context to where we are today as we build upon the work performed by colleagues in the sector over the last 150 years. In 2017, Manager of Collections was launched giving archival ability for the first time control over their collections on discovery. MYC is a web-based application that allows archives to upload their own catalogs to discovery enriching a platform that already hosts over 11 million records from UK archives. These records sit alongside those of the records of UK government included in TNA's catalog. Crucially, Manager of Collections breaks down barriers around inclusion and representation. In 2021, an archive's access to an online catalog is not given. Out of reach of many resource-limited archives or those who are entirely volunteer-led, lack of online representation can lead to these collections becoming hidden and missing from historical narrative and not allowing these communities a chance to share and amplify their voice and their heritage. Manager of Collections provides the platform and the tools for archives to make their collections accessible in a user-friendly way. Archives can catalog their collections into an Excel template that is provided in the system and upload their collection in just three steps to a platform that reaches on average 20,000 users daily. Already, just a few years since the launch of MYC, we have seen collections being added that are diversifying representation on discovery and I just wanted to share a brief snapshot of some of them with you today. The Labour History Archives have recently added the catalogue of Peter Patchell, the Human Rights Campaigner, as well as the catalogue for the support group, Lesley and Engage support the miners. Similarly, we are also seeing a growing number of community archives and local history groups using MYC to put their collections information online for the first time. A2A made great first drives in putting online parish records held in local authority record offices but with MYC providing a free platform to allow groups to describe in their own voice their collection, we can greatly expand local stories and histories of communities and allow for greater research in this area. Managerial collections and the National Register of Archives are inextricably linked. We use data about collections that are uploaded using MYC to add to the NRA indexes. The more diverse collections that are uploaded to discovery, the more we can diversify the NRA indexes and build a more representative picture of the people and the communities that have contributed so richly to our society and our history. If we give custodians of archives greater agency and the tools with which they can share their collections, we can create more authenticity and representation in the historical record. Thank you for listening today and if you're listening and have collections featuring women in your archive or indeed a collection featuring any diverse communities, then I invite you to contribute those collections to discovery and I'm available at the following email addresses and I'm also on Twitter. Thank you very much Caroline, excellent. Our second speaker is Charlotte Roushey and Charlotte is Professor Emerita of Digital Hellenic Studies at Kings College London. I'm also an honorary archivist for the Society for Libyan Studies and there she helps build the tools to present the Society's archives online and also does work around identifiers for relevant materials and in other collections. So if I can invite Charlotte to share your slides, thank you. Thank you very much. Excellent, thank you. Thank you. Libya is a place which exemplifies difficult access, difficulty for people there, difficult for us. Joyce Reynolds, if you want a energetic female creator of archives, worked there from 1947 to 2008 and published. In 2007, a team of us at Kings College started thinking about how to take her material and make it available online, accessible in a way that books can never be. And we started with a book which she had already published in 1952 and turned this into an online resource with which could be much, much richer and above all far more accessible than random copies of the book had been. We were particularly interested in experimenting and 2009 is a long time ago with how to express locations of places. These are archaeological objects to be found in particular places. We still had very primitive systems. Libya had made it very difficult to get hold of geodata because it was sensitive. It became more available through Google Earth but to have a beautiful map and to identify locations on that map are two very different things as we discovered. Toponyms in Libya are completely confusing as you can see. There is no way that you can index a place under just one of these names which themselves reflect the complex history of the country. And our first focus was just to try and build a database of places both ones we could identify and ones we couldn't identify but which we had in the record. And that I think is really quite important to think about. When we went triply and presented this just before the fall of Gaddafi in 2010, Libyans were clearly absolutely thrilled by the accessibility that we had been able to create. We got a level of engagement immediately and people started sending us information. And we realized that the database of places could be useful in itself. And so we worked to put it online and make it pretty and put it online because it could also be used then to be an index to other archives. So you can have an index for a place with the geolocation, with the names, with its relationships and with the entries from the Society for Libyan Studies archive that's now been added and with links to other places. But what's very important is to emphasize what we don't know. For lots of these places, the coordinates that we have are still very unreliable. It's just a few people standing in a desert with rather rickety equipment. And so we want that to be clear to people. And we want people to know what the things are that we have not yet precisely identified. And to, in that way, to encourage people to correct what we've got wrong. So working on this one individual collection, this is Joyce who's just been celebrated her hundred and second birthday. Our work was driven by the nature of the data we had. But we want to get everything out there, including our mistakes. Thank you very much, Charlotte. That's amazing work, really, really valuable work for the Libyan archive. I'm sure that there will be questions about it later on. So the next speaker is Alexandra Lee. Alexandra is a PhD student in human computer interaction design. And she's co-supervised by City at the University of London and the National Archives. And her PhD is looking at how humanities researchers make use of the archival information in their own research. So Alexandra, over to you. Today I'll be looking at a specific part of my PhD project, which focuses on the research practices of humanity scholars and how users create knowledge from archival materials. One aspect of the findings I'm particularly interested in is how users are redistributing the archive through their research practices and the potential implications of this for the archive. So what do we think about when we consider the archive? We might begin with a traditional definition. The archives is a centralized repository where materials are securely stored and accessed. However, as we're all aware in a modern archive, materials may not necessarily be stored nor accessed from this single point. Another way we might consider archives is in terms of their practices. Following Tom Naisman's suggestion, we could consider the archive as any place for archiving occurs. While this usually stops at the point of access, I want to advise to consider what might happen to our understanding of the archive if we broaden this to include the users' practices too. The Jeanette Bastion has discussed the scholarly archive as an essential knowledge space for researchers that extends well beyond the boundaries of the collecting institution. Building on this notion, I believe that users' personal research collections provide an opportunity to examine the link between archives and the scholarly archive. By comparing these practices with those of the archive, we can better understand how the archive is being used by researchers. Personal archives are increasingly important in humanities research. Existing research has shown that users are increasingly moving away from the archive, treating the archival visit as primarily data collection. For example, a recent survey of Canadian historians found that almost 40% took over 2,000 photographs over the course of an archival visit. Now, Trace and Karadkar have proposed what we're seeing as two distinct modes of archival research. In situ, where interpretation takes place primarily within the archive, and ex situ, where researchers capture large amounts of material, measured through photography, for analysis elsewhere. Now, in 2019, I conducted my own study of humanity scholars' research practices at the National Archives. This employed a combined interview observation method, interviewing participants as they engaged in a self-determined routine research task. Eleven participants conducting humanities research took part, and each interview took around an hour. So first I'll provide a bit of an overview of findings here before going into some illustrative quotes. So we found that scholars primarily reflected Trace and Karadkar's notion of ex situ research. Though some showed a combination of both ex situ and in situ methods, none worked entirely in situ. As such, among other practices, collecting was identified as a core practice for all participants. The majority also explicitly discussed building their own personal collections as part of their research process. The two primary information activities were identified as significant to collecting, capturing and organizing. Now, during both, participants sought to preserve aspects of the archival structure through selection and arrangement of materials. This varied between participants, suggesting that each had a unique conception of what was necessary to perform a particular reading of the archive. As recognized by participant 11, there's parts of information and parts of the document. So when I find the document, I just don't only take the one, I always like to take the context as found within. So we see that she sees the complete record as providing context to the information she's interested in. Now, this also scaled up to include the wider context of the archive in series, thus mirroring the structure of the archive in participants' collections. For example, participant six sought to preserve the archival arrangement during capture. By ordering files by reference number, it ensured that when she photographed the document, the images on her camera roll would retain the same grouping of series and file when she consulted them later. In a more complex example, participant seven combined both notes and images. She would write a brief description of the follower's hole in a spreadsheet, also noting any especially important items. These would also be photographed and stored on the cloud. Now, as a more selective approach, we can see that this is really creating a hybrid between her own interests and the archival structure. So whether working in situ or in situ, what emerged was the importance of having a fixed point to work from that generated a perceived archival meaning of the record. For participants with easy access to the archive, this could be the archive itself, but for those working further afield with limited time to visit the archive, their own personal collection of materials might function as this point. So as participant five summed it, I'm just assembling everything that's in the archive so we can access to all offsite through our little photographs and yeah, make sense of it later. So this implies separation between creating the collection and later stages of analysis. Now, this was mirrored further among other participants who commented on later stages of the research process, such as participant 11 who noted, once I have all the documents and I know what's in each one, let's say I'm writing a specific part in my thesis. So then I would copy paste into a separate folder that's about that specifically. So notably, she retains the structure of the original collection for initial interpretation and only once she knows what's in each one does she then move into a different arrangement that better supports her argument. So to summarize, all participants incorporated ex situ work seeking to take records away for later analysis. Now to do so, some built personal collections that sought to preserve some of the archival arrangement to support a notionally archival meaning. However, these practices varied significantly between individuals, suggesting that each held their own conception of what was necessary to perform an archival meaning elsewhere. So for some researchers, it seems that their personal collections of items are de facto becoming the archives, though these users seek to retain some of the archival context largely through preserving provenance and original order through arrangement. These are nonetheless high personalized collections created to support a single interpretation of the archive. So what might be the implications of this for archives? While users working ex situ are a distinct disadvantage as they do not have access to the full archival context. It also highlights the importance of archival context in the early stages of knowledge creation as it's needed to support an archival meaning before users are confident applying this in their own work. This suggests that additional support is needed for these users beyond information acquisition. So additional tools or support would need to reflect users' existing practices, as students have shown they're unlikely to adopt tools unless they reflect existing workflows. For example, tools such as Trophy that allow for arrangement and annotation of documents are capable of both supporting early contextualization in the archival arrangement, but also rearranging at a later stage in the user's project. So though the scholarly archive is a highly personalized and selective rendering of archives, it remains closer than we might think. Users seem to be building personal collections to facilitate sustained access to the archive to successfully interpret an archival meaning. Now more support is needed for these users as they are a distinct advantage due to their distance from the archival context, which has proved central to knowledge creation. Thank you very much, Alex. That's really intriguing about creating archives from archives. So over to the next speaker, Brigitte Lozina. Brigitte is director of policy, open culture and glam at Creative Commons, which of course is the organization behind the Creative Commons licenses, which have now become the standard for open access worldwide. So Brigitte, over to you. Thank you very much, Paula. So I'll be trying to answer this question with you. Why open glam? And I hope that together we can look into the future of open access to cultural heritage. Before going into the details, I just want to highlight the three key points of this presentation. First is that Glam's, and that stands for galleries, libraries, archives and museums fulfill the invaluable mission of caring for our rich cultural heritage and sharing that cultural heritage should be top priority. Now digitized cultural heritage materials should be shared online in the broadest way possible, allowing the public not only to access, but also to use, reuse and recreate cultural heritage. And through Creative Commons open glam program, we support Glam's in ensuring better sharing of cultural heritage. Why open glam? What are the benefits of open glam? Well, I think they can be summed up in three main clusters. The first is that for institutions that share their content, their collections openly, it helps them to gain visibility and relevance through increased digital exposure. It's also a way to bring entire collections to a very wide range of users from researchers as we've seen, but also to learners and also the general public on a global scale. And finally, it also encourages not a passive appreciation of cultural heritage, but innovative and creative engagements, interactions and new interpretations and the generation of new knowledge and narratives around cultural heritage held in collections. However, many institutions face barriers to open glam. And here again, I think we can group them into three different categories. The first is that there is a very complex copyright system that often requires some expert knowledge to navigate. How do you determine if a work is under copyright or if it's in the public domain? If it's in copyright, how do you clear the rights? Who are the right owners? And once it's made available, what permissions do users need to use that content? Second is that the glam sector is marked by conservative policies, practices and mindsets. Often we'll see that there's a fear of loss of control when collections are put online. Institutions might fear that they might be misused or that they might not have control over the narrative, over their objects which they consider they're prerogative to have. There's also a wariness about potential commercial uses or even free writing uses of others taking advantage of the free content that institutions make available. And finally, there are very real financial constraints and sometimes not always justified concerns. So in terms of constraints, well, the cost of digitization itself and the digital infrastructure management is not insignificant. But also there's sometimes a fear of loss of however meager revenue can be derived from traditional licensing. And there are many myths around there that we need to dispel. So Creative Commons offers the tools that will support OpenGlam and the two main ones are the public domain mark and the public domain dedication tool. These are tools that institutions can attach to the digital images to indicate to any potential user that these objects are in the public domain and therefore are free to use and reuse. And at Creative Commons, we are adamant that reproductions of public domain works should remain in the public domain. In other words, if it's in the public domain analog form, it has to remain so in the digital world. There are some limits to OpenGlam. It's not an absolute concept. There might be materials that are culturally sensitive, the knowledge or cultural heritage of indigenous peoples, private or confidential content or material that has been collected in colonization contexts must obey different kinds of restrictions and OpenGlam might meet its limit when those concerns are at stake. This is where the concept of better sharing comes into play where it's not a sharing for its own sake. If you want to learn more, I just gave you a very, very short overview. There are many ways to be engaged. So we provide advice and guidance to GLAMs that want to open up. So tailored advice to individual institutions. We also offer the CC certificate, which is an online course. There's one specifically designed for GLAM practitioners to learn about copyright licensing and the whole OpenGlam ethos. All the resources are freely available and licensed CC by on our website. There's also an OpenGlam platform, which is a place for GLAM practitioners to come and share their experiences, their challenges, and maybe brainstorm some solutions together. We have an annual event called the Global Summit, and this is taking place in September this year. It's a great place to engage in discussions and debate. There's a track on OpenGlam. If you have something to say, please don't hesitate. The deadline to submit a proposal is next Tuesday. So there's still quite some time to do so. And finally, we're in the middle of a major fundraising campaign. We're celebrating 20 years in 2021. And I would invite you also to reach out to me if you're interested in that here on my contact details. And I look forward to any question. Thank you. Thank you very much, Brigitte. It's really interesting to hear about the training opportunities and the community getting together opportunities. And our final speaker is Claire Newing, also from the National Archives. Claire has been working on the UK Government Web Archive since 2009. And so she's going to talk to us about how the team changed the processes during COVID and during the period that we hope will be like no other in the future. Claire. The mission of the Web Archiving Team at the National Archives is to capture, preserve and make accessible UK central government information published on the web. We've been doing this since 2003 and since 2008. We've aspired to capture all central government web resources at least twice each year. The resources we capture are available free of charge to anyone with access to the internet. From our homepage on the National Archives website, users can browse or search our archive website and social media collections. They can also be accessed through Discovery, the National Archives catalog. Our specialist contractors, MirrorWeb, undertake the technical side of the capture process and host the Web Archive and search functions. We also undertake additional snapshots to enhance our record of the UK Government response to events we think will be of particular interest to future researchers. This involves taking more regular snapshots of websites or parts of websites and response to events. This includes the sudden and unpredictable, such as terrorist attacks and civil weather events, as well as events which we can plan for in advance, such as Brexit and the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games. But no amount of prior experience could repair us for what happened in 2020. This slide shows the single page of coronavirus advice on Gov.uk on 29 January 2020. Around this time we started collecting the page more regularly. We also started capturing a small number of pages on other sites. As the pages were small in size and in number, we were able to capture more frequently without interrupting our business as usual work. By 28 March 2020, the UK was locked down and COVID-19 was affecting all aspects of daily life. Almost all government sites now contained information about COVID, which in many cases was being updated frequently. We recognised this would be of interest to future researchers, but could not capture it all using our normal processes. So we adopted a three-pronged approach. The first problem involved undertaking increased frequency in depth crawls of key sites. We identified around 30 sites which were of key relevance to the collection, considered how often they were being updated, and decided how regularly to capture them. We also decided whether to capture them in full or specifically target a relevant section, which is really important because it takes over a month to capture the whole of Gov.uk. Each month we review the list and make changes to call scope and frequency if needed. We also identified some sites which were important, but were not being updated regularly. In order to save our resources, we monitor them using a tool called VisualPing and then capture them when VisualPing is alerted to changes. Prong 2 involves undertaking frequent captures of interactive resources, such as the coronavirus dashboard. Interactive content is difficult to capture using traditional web archiving software, so we could not use our usual pipeline. Fortunately, we had been experimenting for several years with newer technology, which is more successful. We established a process whereby we captured the content in-house at the National Archives and transferred it to MirrorWeb, who integrated with the Public Web Archive. At first we were capturing the content manually, which was very time consuming, but as the pandemic progressed, our technical team continued to experiment with different tools and have now established a semi-automated process. We researched what was prioritized because of the COVID-19 collection, but will greatly help us with our business-as-usual work in future. Prong 3 involved undertaking broadcrawls across the UK web estate. They missed the capture information about how government organizations are affected by COVID-19, for example, how departments are operating differently due to social distancing. In order to identify relevant pages, we used a tool to check the home pages of government sites to see whether they contain specific words or phrases. If a page contains a match, it's added to a list. With an ask MirrorWeb to capture the URLs on that list to a depth of two links. The list of words and phrases is revised regularly, when we are running the broadcrawls fortnightly at present. This slide shows some of the tools we use our team and MirrorWeb use as part of our three-pronged approach. Some are free, while some require a licensed source subscription to be purchased. We were very fortunate that we were able to obtain additional funds from our organization due to the importance of the collection. We were also fortunate that the Web Archive is hosted in the cloud and almost all our tools were available online. This made the transition to remote working much more straightforward for us than for many other teams. And this diagram shows our established Web Archiving process. Quality assurance is a big part of our business as usual work. Usually QA chances are undertaken by MirrorWeb, then by our team, and MirrorWeb would be asked to fix problems before we check them again. For the COVID collection, we decided we would not ask MirrorWeb to undertake QA, and we would not ask them to fix problems in each snapshot. Instead, we would make changes to the instructions sent with future snapshots to ensure the next capture was better quality. This was vital as it enables us to publish snapshots more quickly. We also captured some social media channels. We didn't need to make any changes to our process for capturing social media channels because we were already capturing all new posts daily as part of our business as usual work. However, we recognize that some of the content of a social media archive is going to be amongst the most interesting in the collection. For example, these videos on YouTube of the press conference is given early in the pandemic. We've captured over 160 million additional resources through our COVID-19 course. Early analysis shows that about 40% of the unique resources we've captured do not exist in other OpenWeb archives collections. We've already received correspondence from users who are making use of those resources. Our team is now much more actively doing research into new tools and methods, and into finding ways to put them into production quickly. We are also undertaking more analysis on the collection to guide future developments. So in conclusion, the COVID-19 collection has presented us with many challenges, but overall we're proud of the work we've done. We feel we've done our best and that the collection will be extremely useful to future researchers. Of course it's not finished yet, and so we will continue innovating. Please go ahead and explore it using the links on the slide, and if you've got any questions drop us an email on the email address. Thanks for listening. Thank you very much for the final presentation. If I can invite all the speakers to turn the camera on now, and we can go on to the Q&As. So while we're waiting for questions to come in, I'd just like to go over some of the key issues that there's one sort of running issue that to me has come through in all the presentations, and that's very much the one about users. So we're not just talking about archives and as being resources out there, but I think you've all mentioned the different interactions that users have with your archives. So I wanted to go through the various speakers, and I was wondering, Charlotte, how in your archives about Libyan resources, how do you get users and people to interact with it, especially I'm thinking about what you were describing about geolocating and the difficulty of pinning down places, the spellings of some places in the middle of the desert, how do you get people to help you do that? I think it's really important and really difficult. One of the things I've always found, it's like getting comments in a meeting from your colleagues. If you send around something with mistakes in it, people will correct them, especially if they're academics, whereas if you just ask them for their opinion, they don't always get back to you. So that's why it seems to me very important to show what one has in the state that it's in, and people are starting to say, oh no, that should be that, that's different, but what we really want is to reach users in Libya. And we're only really at the very beginning of all of this, and as things get a little easier, what we'd love to be doing is working with university students in Libya, for example, finding, going and asking Granny what the place was called when she was young, that kind of thing. The other group one really wants to recruit are older people, reaching them, but there are a lot of social barriers to overcome of people not feeling it's, that they're entitled. And I think giving people a sense of entitlement to the use of all these resources is very, very important. And we have to be careful not to make things look too slick, actually. We have to make people feel I could, I could add to this, I could do something, I could contribute something. Yes, I guess it's also that cultural barrier about people feeling that these kind of resources are for them as well. You need a big crowdsourcing project about getting young people and all the people to contribute to that. That's really amazing because one of my other questions was to what degree the resources are you feel are more used in the UK or in Libya or indeed in other parts of the world? Where do the users come from? That's developing, that's developing. I mean, all of this has only been online quite recently. The first stuff we put online in 2009 has been very widely used, including by lots of academics who were very scornful of online academic publication. The best way to find out how something is being used is for the site to crash. Yeah, and see how many people can sleep. See what responses you've got. I've found that very effective. Excellent, thank you. Talking about users, Caroline, I was wondering in the context of discovery, obviously there's still such an established resource and if it did crash, I'm sure you'll get a lot of angry people contacting the archives. But for the first, so I know it's obviously made up of records from big archives to small archives. What is that? How easy is it for contributors to access their own record and indeed add to the descriptions that you have? Say if you have a small archive, which is understaffed, maybe one full-time person and one volunteer? Yeah, we do actually have a lot of archives like that using the system. But I do find that that can be a barrier to participation. But I've found over the last couple of years working more closely with community archives that even though so managerial collections is based on the international standard for archive cataloging, ISADG, and that can feel a bit intimidating at first for some non-professionals because we generally find that the stewards of community archives don't come from a professional archival background. And so we run training webinars and provide guidance and support just to demystify the process a bit and just to help them feel sort of confident that they can contribute. And I'd see once community archives have contributed just how proud and happy they are that their records are online, next to big local authority record offices or next to TNA's own catalogue. And that people are interested. We had a community archive has already had some inquiries from America and they're interested in researching their local parish history. So yeah, it's just the guidance and support that we can provide can sort of help them make that step. So again, in the context of discovery, I know that you have both UK, obviously UK archives, but do you also, does discovery also include international archives? So yeah, what managerial collections is based on the archon directory. So that is basically like our directory of archives and that will be, you know, like opening times, who to contact, website details, and that is broadly UK based. So anyone with an archon code can will have a managerial collections account if they want, if they want it. We do have some quite a lot of American archives listed in archon. And that's purely because sort of way when a lot of English manuscripts were basically sold to America. And so in the NRA, we obviously index record creators. So we have a lot of for Darwin, for example, Charles Darwin, a lot of his manuscripts are in America. So we record the location of those and consequently have American archives in archon, but it's primarily predominantly UK. Excellent. Thank you. And Alex, I was really intrigued by your presentation and the sort of thinking about archives that derive from archives in the research process, in the scholarly process. And I was just wondering, so they seem to me the fruit of something that is very personal to a researcher, you know, the kind of things that the items that they choose to photograph and then to archive. How to what degree do you think that a researcher's personal archive might be of use to another researcher who is perhaps researching a similar area? Or are these collections far too personal that are really only relevant and specific to that particular researcher? So well, so far, I've only got as far as kind of what researchers are interested in gathering from the archive. And they kind of keep those within those collections. So I think it's quite interesting in this, because the focus is perhaps a little bit different from what the archive is doing, you get these kind of narrower emphasis on what is already in the collection. So I think that those things would be really useful to both to other researchers, but also I think to the archive, because I think we can sort of talk about how these, how different meanings can be read into records. But because the archive being having this position has to try and present just one one view through, you know, preserving order or arrangement, whereas with users things, they start to mix this up and it starts to bring out these different contexts. So I think that kind of process of recontextualization could be potentially but very beneficial to other users. When it's then mixed into with other broader, broader archives, maybe other collections or secondary sources, not quite sure how the archive would incorporate that. But I think it kind of reminds me of something. The keynote yesterday, Oliver Atelier was talking about which is that these are connected, but what's missing is the people. And I think it's quite interesting that users are doing this this work of reconnecting these these collections, perhaps how can the archive capitalize on that? Yes, yeah. And I wonder if in terms of sharing some of these collections, whether you're aware of tools, I mean, you mentioned one tool, but I'm not familiar with that, but I don't know to what extent it's the tool that is useful for the personal researcher or also for sharing the collections that they might assemble. Yeah, so there's a few different things out there. I think Propey seems to be the ones most widely used for personal collecting and organizing of materials to help that kind of research process moving from what the people I interviewed called the archival meaning to applying that in their own work and creating their own arguments from that. I think with these existing tools, what's quite interesting is that they are, I think you've got this divide between like finding things which the archive sees as its responsibility and then interpreting and using those collections, which is really left up to the user, which is why we see all of these tools that are kind of like the personal responsibility of the researcher to search out and adopt. I think it would be really interesting to see the archive kind of taking more of that responsibility on board and offering offering these tools to researchers in house. That's really interesting. Thank you. Brigitte, you're the next one on my screen and I think a lot of people will hopefully be familiar with open licensing and Creative Commons and the great work that Creative Commons does. I was caught by a line in your slides in terms of the barriers and I think that something that keeps on coming back and perhaps needs demystifying this idea that the potential economic gain that might return to glam organisations from the sales of images and you put it in between brackets. I was wondering if you have something to tell us in terms of whether that is because obviously we know that a lot of museums and galleries, they have picture libraries and they sell their assets but you were perhaps challenging that in your slides. Yes, thanks for that question. I think this is something that we need to challenge because there is evidence out there and many researchers have shown that the revenue that is derived from licensing often does not compensate or does not outweigh the cost of managing those rights. Many studies have shown that the salary of the person managing the licensing often outweighs the any benefit that might be made and that revenue derived from licensing is often so low that it's not a profitable business model for an institution. Having said that we do recognise that it's a huge investment to digitise and maintain an online platform so there are ways to recoup digitisation and making available investment and we're really interested in looking at what business models might be available out there for institutions that want to make their content freely available online and there are some so it's really interesting to see what alternatives there are. We're also very interested in valuing the collections in terms of business opportunity so that the public can benefit from open access and institutions themselves can still be financially sustainable. Thank you. That's a really interesting point about looking at what the evidences that we have to back up some assertions. But another thing that is perhaps again a challenging area with open licensing is when we have to do with content that might be particularly sensitive or content from indigenous cultures or sort of sensitive heritages. So I wonder whether you have any comments on how to handle a will we still want to advocate completely open licensing why not or what might be the issues there. Right so I think that the general proposition is that we defend open access on restricted access as far as possible but that in some cases we have to acknowledge that there are some ethical or even sometimes legal or cultural caveats that we that we need to respect and why that arises is that often people will look at the copyright status of an object and will forget that there might be other considerations attaching to the object itself so there might be some cultural restrictions some that derive from customary law or from customary practices traditional practices linked to a certain object and they might impose restrictions that are not at all reflected in the copyright system so if an object is considered in the public domain freely available to use and reuse under copyright law that doesn't mean that there are no other restrictions that might be ethical or like I said cultural and attention then arises because a digital image will have several ties it will have a tie to its physical object in the institution which might belong to the institution and therefore there's a property title there's also sometimes a layer of right and the in the digital image themselves so there might be a copyright if for example it's a photograph of an object the photographer might have rights in there but there is also a stewardship or a custodian ship relationship between the object and the community that might still hold it as part of their living cultural heritage and it's navigating these different ties that will eventually lead to a solution where together with the community the institution will be able to take action and determine whether restrictions need to be applied to make content available online. Thank you and Brigitte there's a there's a comment and a question for you coming from our audience the comment is about the revenues so both are about the revenue and economic aspect we were talking about so somebody just pointing out that revenues are so small in relative terms they're sometimes still useful to help with digitization and purchase of preservation material so I suppose that that's something that institutions also have to bear in mind and the question it's related so I'll read it out to you now again in terms of the the the cost of institutions just selling so having the service that sells the images and they're pointing out whether they're probably assuming that institutions that do license images have done their sums so there may be some institutions for whom that is fairly financially still profitable I don't know if you have any more comments on what you've already said. No and I agree that this has to be probably examined on the case-by-case basis but the evidence that we have seen is that the costs far outweigh the benefits of having such a licensing system and I guess the one point that I would make is that if your collection is not openly available how will people know that it's there how will these commercial opportunities arise if everything is hidden behind a paywall so to speak and subject to a complicated licensing mechanism the idea is to make it as openly accessible as possible and then with re-users perhaps looking into some monetization options but I do agree that the cost of making collections online is not insignificant and that we have to look into more innovative business models to ensure that the public benefits the institution benefits and there are constant recreations and re-uses of cultural heritage because that's what one of the reasons that we we want to preserve it is because we want to continue to build upon it and and create more more culture on top of it. Yeah there is another comment about Creative Commons but I think that applies also in general to archives and the materials that we publish so I'm going to open it up to everybody I'm just going to read it out there are a lot of community archives where images of individuals may be shown those people often do not want images of themselves used everywhere especially commercially so people need to be more aware of the rights of people portrayed in the images and that include children so collections need to be aware that CC licenses cannot be revoked so as I said I'm just going to throw it to all of you if if anybody has a comment one more statement Charlotte I think it raises really interesting questions of who owns what do I own the image of myself and I've often wondered whether when if when photography first started to develop people had philosophized the relationship of a photograph to the individual in a different way supposing you had to have permission every time you published the photograph of an individual imagine what our environment what would newspaper front pages look like how it's as what ifs go it's really quite an interesting one but but it shows I think that the the stable door it's too late that people are the image of people has been turned into something that is just freely available so when you photograph the crowd you photograph the crowd yeah Bridget I don't know if you have any other comments from yeah I think that the situation has quite evolved in the last few years where privacy and data protection concerns online have really surfaced and have become challenging for some people who didn't realize at the time that they were making their content freely available under creative commons license and then came to realize that maybe the terms of light of the license did not prevent uses that they had not envisaged and that violated somehow their right to privacy but I just want to clarify that it's true that the creative commons licenses do not govern privacy or personality rights or image rights it's solely copyright that's being license and so any other consideration have to be made aware to anyone who would want to make their content available under a cc license but this is an issue that's being dealt separate of the terms of the license which as I said are limited to to copyright law thank you thank you and Caroline you have your hand up um yeah I just wanted to add to the conversation really and just say that it is a key consideration when an archive you know comes to undertake a digitization project um sort of what am I digitizing you know do I have the rights to digitize it and I just wanted to sign post a couple of useful resources um if anyone needed them obviously we have good guidance on um on our website on the national um the national archives archive sector development web pages and also the community archives and heritage group is a really great resource for any community archive out there um sort of you know if they're just starting out thinking you know I've got this really amazing collection how can we utilize it how can we you know get it out there to more audiences then that um that group is a really useful group for sort of knowledge sharing and um has useful guidance on their website excellent thank you Caroline we've just got a couple of minutes but I do want to get to Claire because the the web archives are um something that's always intrigued me and uh excellent I was going to ask you Caroline to put something on the in the chat but I see we've already got a link um uh for the resources that you've just mentioned um Claire the you talked about the project um that you've been uh uh involved in uh with the web archive and I was really intrigued by the fact that um you have to decide when and you know based on what criteria to there's a when to crawl the web and what kind of criteria to set and the the keywords for example that um that you listed there and I was just wondering how do you go about creating those criteria or the parameters that then you use to why those words and not others or what what makes you decide to go one way um as opposed to another really with the um the keyword list it was really just looking at what was being said at the time very early in the in the pandemic and we we just looked at a number of websites and looked at key phrases that kept coming up again and again particularly we also use the news as well um phrases that sort of buzz phrases that are being used in the news are quite interesting for that and we just keep an eye on it as time goes as time's gone on things are things are shifted we've moved at certain points it's moved the focus has moved towards work at certain points towards education and we've we've added and removed things as we can it's it's really not any more scientific it's quite manual it's not sort of terribly scientific uh artificial intelligence so picking out words there not at the moment I'm we've we've now got we're now very fortunate that we have a data analyst in our team for the first time um and he's he's brilliant and um we're starting to work with him to try and look at how we can um computerize these processes um mainly just make them quicker um and it's been really eye-opening for our team to have somebody who can who can who can do this sort of things it's really helpful um but I can't ever see a situation where that this will ever be done completely using an AI resolution I think there'll still be some kind of human being curation in there to an extent um even to setting up the the training models for it yeah but it will become more more computerized as time goes on I think and we've already actually used this the technique on another collection because when the Duke of Edinburgh passed away recently we were suddenly in a situation where many many government websites had a very small amount of information about the Duke of Edinburgh on them and we we again looked at what what the keywords were saying what his titles were um and use that exact same technique to get a very wide but very shallow collection of what people were saying about the um the Duke of Edinburgh but on government websites so it's it's quite flexible