 My name is Bob Darnton. I'm the university librarian at Harvard. And I'm here to introduce the speakers of this particular session, who will bring you up to date about the work done yesterday at the various work streams, because a lot is going on. And we feel a necessity, really, to explain to you and to everyone who is observing us from all these different points exactly what is happening, because a lot is happening. A great deal is going on. In fact, it seems like an eternity since the DPLA was a gleam in the collective eye of just a handful of people who met at Harvard in October 2010. An enormous amount has happened since then. And the DPLA is now, as you could tell, from this morning's wonderful talks, beginning to belong to everyone. There is no proprietorship, but it's got to get organized. So I think we're moving from a phase in which we've had vision statements and manifestos and a lot of high-principled rhetoric to a stage of nuts and bolts. Now, one of the bolts that is going to tie down the DPLA as an actual functioning organization is legal. That is to say, the steering committee made a decision last week to apply to become a 501C3 organization. That means it will become a legal entity, and it will acquire probably a board of trustees, people with legal responsibility for it, and an organizational structure. How will that happen? Well, happily, the National Endowment for the Humanities said, we would like to help you get headquarters. We would indeed like to give you a grant of $1 million. You should have matching funds, three more million. With that total, you could seriously get into business. But of course, they didn't promise anything. You have to apply. Your application has to be referee. This is not a guarantee, but it's an opportunity. And we thought we should cease that opportunity, which means taking the next very concrete steps into a future that will get the DPLA up and running in April 2013. One of these steps will be to find an executive director. So if you've got ideas about someone very talented out there, let us know. But of course, we will have a very carefully operated search with a search committee. We'll do it right. But we will have an executive director. We will have headquarters. They will be modest. We don't know where they will be. But I will promise you, I think I could say this, John, they will not be in Harvard. Some of us love Harvard. But I often think Harvard is like the New York Yankees. People love to hate it as well. In any case, it was a happenstance that the first embryonic incubational phase of the DPLA began at Harvard. That incubational phase will soon come to an end. But I would like to pay tribute to the people at the Berkman Center who have been really working flat out to get us born, so to speak, to change this embryo into a living, vibrating being. First of all, John Palfrey, who's led the work of the secretariat, is chair of the steering committee. And then others scattered here. Maura Marks, I see. And Rebecca Haycock and David Weinberger. Well, you meet a lot of them throughout the course of the day. They've done a wonderful job. So we are expanding. And the expansion, in a way, I think will follow the model of creative commons, which also began as a gleam in some collective eyes at the Berkman Center at Harvard. It's now located in San Francisco. It's a large and thriving community, which is serving the whole world, really. So we hope that that kind of a model, or the Wikipedia, Wikipedia-media model, will work for us. We're expanding. And the expansion isn't just geographical, although we would like to signal that by meeting here in San Francisco. It's also, so to speak, sociological. We really want to reach different constituencies throughout the country. We're working hard to cooperate with community colleges. We will have new people coming in from the world of independent research libraries. A great deal is going on. But that means there are decisions to be made. And the steering committee has been working hard, at least, to get through a preliminary phase of decisions, which we will now present to you. And you will get a series of reports on what's been happening recently. First of all, Susan Hildreth will give you some words about yesterday's meetings. She, as you know, is the director of the Institute of Museum and Library Services, a former library director here in San Francisco. And so she will speak. And then Mackenzie Smith, who is an independent consultant formerly with MIT and Harvard and with Creative Commons. She will bring us up to date on another aspect of things. And then Nate Hill, who is the San Jose public library and a well-known blogger for the Public Library Association. So this will give you some sense of the connecting tissue between these six different work streams that have been meeting all over the country, coming up with ideas, and now are coming up for proposals for action. So I'd like to turn the floor over to John Paul Free, who will be able to look after things and help you to ask questions. Thank you so much. So my job at this session is to spend a few minutes at the outset to describe the consensus that we perceive exists with the DPLA in terms of what, in fact, the DPLA is. And this is meant to be not my own personal views, but the views of this growing community of people who are working on it. And then we're going to turn it over to three people who are going to report out on the work streams, which is where all of the core activity of the DPLA is, in fact, happening. And just to be really clear, those work streams remain completely open to anyone who wants to participate. It is the rolling up the sleeves and the sausage making as Mackenzie calls it. And occasionally we fight and argue and so forth. And if you want to be in the fighting and arguing in a loving and supportive and productive way, join the work streams. But I want to make two things clear in addition to that invitation. The first is what problem are we solving for, or series of problems are we solving for? And then second, what are the elements of the DPLA that we've already decided will be in it and where there are some soft spots and some elements where we have to do further work? So in terms of the problems we are solving for, I think of them as three related problems. One is the collective action problem, which is lots of us in different parts of this great country and in different kinds of organizations are doing very similar things in terms of digitizing material, adding metadata, making it available. And yet we're not doing it in as coordinated a fashion as we might. You could think about this as sort of the human social engineering aspect of standardization or interoperability among these activities. This is something where Bob said there's nothing proprietary about it. There are no mothers or fathers of this effort. It's really saying can we get ourselves much more organized than we've been in the past as we do this in the public interest. And can we do that? I'm totally convinced that we can. This is the can-do American pragmatic spirit and I know we can do it. Solve that collective action problem. Related to that, and Nate will talk about this in particular, is really coming at this from the user perspective. As we have been digitizing materials in all of our various ways, I think very often we've put them in silos where they're actually kind of hard to find and hard to use and hard to bulk download or do other things from it. So coming at this from the perspective of human beings who are trying to access this knowledge for a series of wonderful traditional library and the wonderful not yet imagined possibilities that we heard of earlier, that's a big piece of what we're trying to solve for. And then third, there's a lot of material that's still not available in digital format. And there's much still to be done in terms of mass digitization. We're gonna end the day with a bunch of visionary people who are talking about government records that have yet to be digitized. Even those those are in the public domain, even though we're all paying for them, there's a lot of information and knowledge and lots of formats and lots of places that is not yet digitized. And we need to do that now and in a big push. So we hope the DPLA will be a big push forward in this way and doing it with our friends from Wikipedia and elsewhere as a collaborative effort. So those I think really are the problems that we're solving for. That's still pretty capacious in terms of vision, but I think it's descriptive of what we're trying to accomplish. So what is the DPLA gonna be? There are five elements as we think about the DPLA and apologies to those who've heard these five elements over and over again, but I think as we keep pushing at them, we will in fact make more progress. And what we've done in getting to these five elements is try to expand the agreement that we have around concepts. So as Bob and Doran mentioned, there was one sentence we agreed to back in October, 2010. And then we wrote a four page concept note from last March and now we've got a seven page concept note and coming out of these meetings, we will make that even longer as we have further agreement. This is posted on a Wiki. It's entirely discussable and editable and so forth, but it's trying to get us to have a consensus that we're working toward. And by April, 2013, we will have a functioning working version of this to describe to the world. It's not gonna be done of course a year from now, but there's gonna be something we can all push around. And that comes in these, in essence, part of five pieces. So the first is actually code. We heard from our friends from the independent bookstore world that it would be great to have an open source code base of material. Of course, the libraries have done this for some time, but we are building an open platform with open APIs completely devoted to an open source approach to this that will allow people to build on top of it where we can take that code base and bring it into local libraries or into big institutions, push it around, add various user interfaces on it. This is what David Weinberger and his team will unveil in the afternoon session is an initial sneak peek at what we've been doing on that score. We welcome enormous broad participation in that effort. People who have been doing the beta sprints, for instance, have already been working with this and contributing code. The key thing is nobody can write proprietary code for the DPI light. The whole point is this is shared. It's a source board or a GitHub for the library community and pushing that forward. Second is metadata. We've heard a lot about this already, but this is one area where I think we really are pushing hard and doing already a very good job. We've got within this platform that David will talk about, we have already a bunch of open metadata made available on an open access basis for people to use and reuse. Last week or actually earlier this week on the 24th, we at Harvard released nearly 100% of our records for catalog records and also other metadata. Thank you, Brewster and others who have championed this. This is our gift or our first effort towards realizing the DPLA. This is one institution's effort. There are other institutions, San Francisco Public. I know there are others who are committed to doing this and others who already have putting all of these bibliographic records into a shared repository for anyone to bulk download and do whatever they want with. We've already heard from a number of people they're playing around with it and we will continue at that. I think this is the next open access movement from open access to content to open access to metadata and we hope others will participate and join together in that. Third is content and this is the trickiest zone. We'll hear a little bit more from my colleagues in a moment but the DPLA of course will have content. We've thought about this as having in essence two polls and we're trying to figure out where we fall within that. On the one hand is would this only be metadata? And I think everybody says no, that's not gonna be satisfying if this is just a metadata service. On the other hand is it that we're building this one big colossal huge database, the end all be all of all libraries to end the need to create any more libraries? It's not that either. It really is I think a set of services, a set of a network that will have access to content and figuring out when we digitize materials or encourage it, how will we bring that together? And I think we're working with various ideas of federation and network where we see making access to content crucial for what the DPLA is. In fact, encouraging the digitization of it, probably keeping of some versions of it particularly in the public domain in a reservoir as Carl Malamud calls it that others can bulk download. My sense is that much of the usage of the DPLA will be not just people coming through the DP.LA front door thinking that might be 20% of uses or something but 80% of the time people coming through the Chattanooga library or the San Jose public library where local librarians have taken the code and the metadata and the content and curated it locally for specific purposes. And when they digitize things like what Dwight's doing in the Georgetown County public library, uploading it into this same shared environment. And that's what we're trying to figure out something between those two polls that really does change things but doesn't ultimately ignore what we know about networks and the internet and particularly important here in this space to acknowledge that. So one is code. Two is metadata. Three is content. Four is tools and services. We've also heard from others the need for us to be doing the development of tools and services together. I love Emily Gore's notion of the Scana-Bago getting a bunch of Winabagos with scanners in the back and library students. How many library students are here? All right, this is so great. Okay, library students and retired librarians and active librarians. We want them the core of librarians in Scana-Bagos, driving around this country, finding those local historical societies and libraries and others that have content but don't have the technology and so forth to do it, uploading it for their local patrons and uploading it also into this shared repository. So that's one idea there are many others. Why don't we, the next time iPad apps come up, why don't we code an iPad app one time that people can script and make local rather than having us do it 15,000 times and so forth. I think working with IMLS and others, these are things we can do. And then fifth and most crucially is community. I think that having Wikimedia, the Wikimedia Foundation friends, sorry, I've tripped over it three times over here, to me is absolutely exemplary of what we are trying to do with the DPLA. This is, there are many amazing examples of kinds of networked organizations that have worked. I am completely convinced that the fact that we've had two oversubscribed plenary events, we've got 1,000 plus people on the listserv, it taps into a desire on all of our part to work together and to geek out in favor of creating this particular thing. And I can imagine that in years in the future, just as the Wikimedia crew have pulled together these great events once a year that bring people together to edit articles and argue about the future of Wikipedia, I can see the DPLA having such a similar thing, Lollapalooza slash Wikimedia slash, let's update that metadata. And I think there are those librarians, and we all as librarians and technologists who will want to come together in that kind of a way to create a public resource. And I think what the DPLA in a sense is at its core is the group of people who wish to solve this collective action problem. We do not want to see a future that is one that is controlled by one or a few proprietary interests in this way. And we know that if we join forces as public and private agencies, as local and big libraries, as public and private libraries, we know that we can do better than what we have today. And it ultimately is a community organizing movement. And I think that is fundamentally what DPLA is and will be and can be with your help. With that, we very much encourage you to participate in filling in the blanks that are there. We have another year to go before we launched this in 2013, but it will be better. It will be greater for all of our participation. And with that, I'd love to turn it over to my colleagues who can tell us more directly what's going on. So Susan Hildreth, thank you. Thank you, John. Okay, thank you. Okay, well, I'm gonna talk briefly here. Oh, did I? Am I okay? I'm gonna talk briefly. And in fact, John and Bob did cover a lot of my territory, so that's probably good. But I'm very happy to be speaking with you today. And just reflecting a little bit on what John said, you know, resource sharing, sharing of information is really at the heart of what we all do as librarians and do for our customers. And I'm gonna shout out to my colleagues here in California where our dear Governor Brown has reduced, has eliminated the funding for all resource sharing, but our libraries have a history and a sense of that and they are continuing to do that resource sharing without that funding. So we're gonna talk a little bit about funding in some of my remarks, but I think our essence of sharing is what is going to make the DPLA successful. So we do have a governance work stream. I'm involved in that governance work stream. We had a great meeting yesterday because it was the first time we really had people from other work streams coming in and learning a little bit more about what we're doing. But the first thing, one of the things I'm proudest of that the governance work stream has done is we've adopted an open meeting policy for DPLA. I think we've talked about it a little bit here. We had our first steering committee meeting this morning that was open. We had lots of great feedback there. So we are really trying to model what we wanna see in this organization. So again, all our work streams are open, all our meetings are open. So what did we talk about in terms of governance? It's interesting because really DPLA is responding to challenges as they come forward. So I think some of you have heard about this great opportunity we have to submit an application for funding from the National Endowment for the Humanities, a challenge grant. And in order to do that, we really had to make a determination about our structure. So a 501C3 is the way DPLA is going to be moving forward, but we had some great discussion about what is that 501C3 going to look like? Is it gonna be a membership organization? Is it going to have a board of directors? So I want you all to be assured that people are thinking about these issues and in fact, we're acting on these issues. And if you want to follow our work streams, please do that, you can see what's going on. So some of the key questions are how are we going to plan the transition so that by April, 2013 we have stood up an organization, no matter where it will be. I'm so interested in hearing about the places where it might be. We know, we think it won't be in Cambridge. That's the word from our friends at Cambridge, but we want to, and it really is all of us sharing the work together. So maybe the headquarters isn't that important, but we do have to have some kind of nexus. And I also know that everybody says, well, we wouldn't put it in Washington, DC. So we won't offer that up, although we could have some space there to help you out. But it's really about working together and finding the best way to manage our organization. We also talked significantly in governance, and I know all you're talking about this too, we're gonna hear from our colleagues as well, about membership and participation. What is really the value of DPLA? And I think when we look at that, we look at the supply and the demand side. We want to be able to supply material to the public, but we also wanna be able to have activities that would incend people to belong. And those are issues that we're all struggling with, but it's evolving. We're moving forward, and we're gonna make some real good decisions. I know we are over the next few months at the governance committee, going, developing our bylaws and moving forward with the 501C3. We're going to be identifying a role and structure for a board and executive director. And as Rob Darten said, bringing on an individual with assistance from the board and all of you is really important to move this ahead. So that's one of the key activities of the governance committee as well as the steering committee. And I'll let all those librarians out there know, we're taking advantage hopefully of ALA and Anaheim and having a job description ready for the ED for DPLA. So put your thinking hats on and we can really push this job out there. And I'm sure there are gonna be many other venues, the archivists and all kinds of places, but we are taking advantage of the timelines and activities and we're gonna really try to make that happen. So hopefully you will all put your thinking caps on too about that. Also we wanted to talk a little bit about, and I'll move this forward, about our approach to digitization. And I think John has really covered that well. And I think that that's a concept that we're all struggling with. And I think what we wanna do with DPLA, we really are at that continuum of providing access to metadata and digitized material, but also providing an opportunity to identify and digitize more material so that will be available for our citizens. And what Dwight did about Georgetown, that was just great. And there are many, many other Georgetown's out there that we really wanna try to bring into the fold. And I'm a real believer in local content being important because in the internet digital age, we all see the same thing every day on CNN and NMSNBC and Fox if that's the way you wanna go. I don't know how many people here would go for Fox but we're in a church so we have to be equitable. Anyway, we hear the same thing all the time. And what is unique is what is local and special in our communities. And I strongly believe that what will make the DPLA successful is really making visible and easily discoverable that unique content. So we are constantly talking about that and we really wanna make sure we develop opportunities to take advantage of the regional, local, statewide efforts that are going on. And many of the efforts that are going on, particularly in our public libraries and to some extent our academic libraries have been seeded by federal funds from IMLS either through the state library program or competitive programs. So we really wanna make an attempt to identify those centers of capacity and build on them to help some of our less resourced libraries so they really can participate in this great organization. And I think what is DPLA? John really addressed that very well. I think we are still in the framing stages but it's very wonderful to see so many people here who are willing to get into that discussion with us because the more ideas we have, the more progress we can make. And we also talked a little bit at our governance meeting about funding models. And you know, what is our funding model gonna be? I guess what we wanna think about is we'll build it and the funding model will come. I don't know if that's the best way to go but we have great support from the private community and I also think that we will be able to provide some benefits that even at the local or state level those funds might be able to be tapped and we also might be able to identify federal funds either in the future or federal funds that are already available that we could add digitization purposes to the use of those funds. So I think that we have many strategies for funding but I really do believe that when we focus on what we have to deliver and the benefits we will be able to determine how to fund it. Now in the afternoon yesterday, we had a really exciting meeting I think because the governance committee met with the financial and legal representatives from those work streams and we really I think came up with a plan that we could all work on and we are constantly refining our plans and checking in to consensus for where we're going but I think the business and financial team really felt like they had something to begin to work with as we all articulated what we're hearing more and more from you and other folks involved in the effort. So we looked at, we're looking of course at a startup phase. We wanna get that going as soon as possible so it is really stood up and available to move forward as of April 2013. We're looking at a new organization as we said a 501C3 with a very minimal footprint and I think we are depending on working with the power of our distributed network and that's why it's very important for us. We know there's some nodes of capacity already and we wanna identify even more so that we can create a distributed network in terms of gathering up all the data we want as well as helping some of our less resourced members to really work together. And I think if we can work with that distributed cooperative consortium based model we will be able to maintain a fairly small national footprint. So we've looked at trying to do some general estimation of the cost of those activities and I think the NEH grant has helped drive us to think about what do we really need to keep this effort going and we're looking at perhaps two to $5 million a year. And of course we're hoping that for the first several years that will be private funding but ultimately it could be funded in some other way. That's enough to support some of our activities going and we're really thinking about the first year probably two minute, two million, second year, three million and third year and beyond five million to sustain a core organization. But that's really just the beginning. And I think we wanna make sure that we continue to have our huge vision and this could cost, it could provide much more and it also could cost much more. But we really wanna try to build the DPLA incrementally and I think that there are good business cases to do that. I really think we can start modestly and move forward. That's the plan that we really came up with with the financial stream and the legal stream and I think it is a footprint and an outline that we can begin to develop for 2013. So we wanna start modest and go big. And finally I just did wanna mention that I think we do want to and I heard a lot today already manage expectations. We have great expectations of what we're going to do but we also wanna have some really one or two super duper things that we're gonna have ready on April 2013 and we will be able to do that. When we look at the DPLA, I know Wikipedia and it's always great to hear from Phoebe from Davis, my hometown in California, shout out to UC Davis. Thank you Phoebe for all the work you do with Wikipedia. But even though our program is a bit different, I think that collaboration and crowdsourcing of all kinds of information and data and sharing and helping our customers is really gonna make DPLA work. So Wikipedia is a model we can look at and then we'll really create all our own best practices. But I have been involved in this now for at least over a year and I think in the last several months due to the hard work of all these committed individuals who are doing this along as their other day jobs, we're really making progress. I feel like we are making progress and beginning to see what DPLA is take shape and we've done a lot already in the last day here. Thank you. My name is Mackenzie Smith and I had the pleasure of moderating a couple of the sessions yesterday involving the content and the technology work stream. So I have to confess that I'm not on either one of those groups. So there are probably things that I don't know about the history of them and all the hard work they've been doing. But what I wanted to report on today is kind of where we are at this moment in time and what will be coming in the near future because I think in those two work streams in particular, that's where the rubber meets the road a little bit and we're all staring down the barrel of the gun of April of next year. Because I'm sure you all know how hard it is to actually build something that will evoke what DPLA could be but not be everything that it will become, right? So that is a very difficult thing to do in such a compressed timeframe and one of the things John didn't mention is that this is the point in time where we have to start making very difficult choices about what can be accomplished in such a short time but still show the potential and get people really excited about what we're gonna be building over the next many decades collectively, right? So what we did yesterday and you're gonna be seeing a demonstration and discussion of the prototype platform this afternoon so I don't need to go into any detail of that, just know that that's coming. And also the content works doing content scope have done a great job of pulling together some ideas about how to leverage the existing work that's out there, collections, metadata and so forth to begin to pull together a critical mass of content in particular areas. I think immigration is a theme that's been discussed as one of the potential areas that we can all contribute something to. So what we've been missing a little bit is knowing what that user experience is gonna be and I think Nate's gonna talk about how that process is going in a few minutes but we understand that that's really the key piece is what will you see, what will you experience? Both as a member of the public and as an institution that's participating in it. So I can't really speak to that but what we're gonna do in the content and technology side is do a better job of integrating our work going forward. So the platform has been on their death march to get to the prototype that you'll see today and the content group similarly has been working really hard to figure out what's out there that we can pull together and I know they're planning some surveys and things to continue that work but this is the point in time where we have to kind of integrate these two efforts. So the commitment over the next few months is to start to develop a roadmap that will be publicly available so you'll be able to see when particular events are gonna happen and how you can get involved at that point. A little warning is a good thing usually if you're being asked to give feedback and spend some time evaluating things so we're gonna do a better job of that and similarly kind of general communication about the status of it, maybe looking for people to experiment with early prototypes of what you're gonna be seeing so we're getting feedback along the way. This is a very open, very participatory, very transparent process but people do need to know when to pay attention because we all have such limited time to share and we really need help with these things. So what else can I tell you? I think you will have a chance to give input on what's in and what's out of this first prototype but just be aware that we have to make some choices and not everything will be demonstrated in that platform so you have to use your imagination a little bit but there will be something to see at that point and I think that's really all I have to share at this moment, so thank you. Hello there, so I'm here to report back to you guys from the audience and participation work stream. Why don't I start that by making a big call for some audience and participators in that work stream? We need more people. We are sort of moving into a different phase of things now and I think the best way to look at that is that the audience and participation work stream is sort of turning into something of a user experience department. We are finding that the work that we need to do in that group is going to inform what happens in all of these other work streams and so the technical people can't know what they are making unless we have some good case studies of what the users want. Likewise, the content people can't really decide on content unless we're talking about what the users want as far as the content is, so we've gotten started and basically I'm gonna be pretty brief because what we really realize in this very exciting set of meetings yesterday is that we have a lot of work to do and so we identified the work that we have to do and that has started as a series of use case scenarios of just people and their various information seeking behaviors, segmenting audiences and creating different sort of profiles around those audiences and then creating a narrative that goes along with that. So I think I had a slide that was maybe gonna pop up that okay and so this is super rough, this is the beginning of an outline but you can imagine that we would have all of these different types of users that might come to a DPLA interface of some sort and so what are the problems they're trying to solve? So if we describe those in great detail, we can figure out where the DPLA fits into each of those things and this is just a screenshot but you would be able to kind of click around on all of these things. We also discovered through conversation that we need to not only think about these end user scenarios but also about the institutional scenarios with the institutions as end users, as participants and so we're going to try to create a similar kind of document describing the whole breadth of all of that as well and again we're gonna be looking to all of you to help inform these pieces of this thing and finally I think we had some really good conversation around the different sort of strategic plans and missions that individual institutions have and how the different pieces of the DPLA can mesh well with that because if we can figure that out then we're able to, well we're able to make things make sense on a local level so I'm sorry that I'm being so brief because it's really, it's more that we just wow, we know we have a lot to do now, right? But I can't say enough how much we want more input and more help in this particular work stream as things go on from here so thank you so much and any questions and stuff we can deal with. Yeah. Thank you. Yeah. There are many people who are actually not represented up here on the screen at the stage who have been working very hard. I see Rachel Frick one of the leads of the content and scope work stream. Of course audience participation is chaired by Carla Hayden and Peggy Radd who are not able to be here. I see Paul Carrant is sharing the business models work stream and there are no doubt others in the room but thank you to those who have been working so hard on the work streams. So we have about 17 minutes until lunch and we thought this would be a good time where we've got some mics to pass around if you have questions, hope streams about the deep play and where it is right now, we can have that conversation. As the mics are going around and you're thinking about your questions, couple of notes from me. If you're on the live stream and you wanna send in a question or tweet it, please do and we'll be trying to track those questions down and channel them in. One clarification on what Susan was talking about in terms of budget, we were talking about a two to five million dollar kind of core team budget. I was to emphasize the modest footprints internally not to say we think the DPLA can be built on that kind of money. This is obviously a nine or 10 figure kind of enterprise if we're talking about all the digitization work that has to happen. The point is only that we don't see the DPLA as sucking all of the money into a common place but rather that we're gonna help to coordinate these funders and get money out to those who are already doing this kind of work. So I just wanted to indicate that we're not completely on drugs and we're thinking this is off point so far in terms of scale but our commitment to a small core organization that we're setting up. So who has a question or comment about where we stand? Yes please, if we could get a mic in the middle. And if you wouldn't mind telling us who you are and where you're at. Yes, I'm Ellen Meltzer from the California Digital Library. Can you tell me what's the relationship of any to the Hathi Trust? Sure, in fact maybe we wanna pass the mic back to Professor Courant there who is involved in the Hathi Trust himself but I think he's probably the best person to describe it. Because he's involved in both. There is no formal relationship there I think as mutual amiability and I'm very hopeful that some of the things that you've been contributing that we have will be at least pointed at and in other cases used more in the DPLA as it evolves. The first meeting of the new Hathi Trust board is next week and I'm certainly not gonna commit the Hathi Trust in any way until that meeting. It's a crucial question that one could ask the same question vis-a-vis the internet archive or the California Digital Library or many others and I think it's a core principle of the DPLA to be complementary and not competitive to all the great initiatives that have been going on and I think one way to see this is as a big tent effort or an umbrella effort where we are working toward these particular use cases and ideally we'll amplify this and so each project that has been doing important things hopefully seeing themselves and individuals seeing themselves succeeding through involvement in this effort rather than trying to suck all things into one centralized organization. So crucial question. Martin, yes in the back. Hi, I'm Martin Gomez. A while back there was a discussion I think at a previous conference about kind of the communication strategy. You guys have had some good press recently about the activities of DPLA. Have you started to think a little bit more about communication strategy to people like us out in the field that would help us explain as well as in some ways not to defend but certainly create better understanding among people who are giving us funding, et cetera about what our role might be in either public libraries or academic libraries? It's a great question. Of course you cross over this boundary now, Martin. That's exciting. I don't know Nate, do you want to speak since from the audience and participation viewpoint and obviously someone who speaks to and with the public library community? Sure. Yeah, wow. What did that mean? The voice of God, I think, was speaking. I have a thing here. Well, it just said a nod of agreement that we need to be working on communicating while we all need to be writing about this stuff. We need to be tweeting about this stuff. Like if everybody in this room writes a really solid blog post about this particular incident here, then you're able to, yeah, I don't know what that meant. But you know what I'm saying. If everybody here writes something and then we've got that communication strategy happening sort of informally, do I personally think that we need to have sort of a formal communication strategy? Yes, of course, and I think we all do, but it's something we're working on. So you guys, write and tweet, please. Could I add something? You could and then the mic's going to Luis as well. Yeah, just real quickly and that is that on the DPLA Diplo website, there is a great document called the Concept Note that John has drafted and he's recently redrafted, really reflecting a lot of the activity and some of the high level assumptions and consensus we have agreed to. And I would just encourage all of you to look at that and just take little parts and pieces from it. You don't need the whole thing, but if you wanted to try to look at some talking points to share with your colleagues or staff, the DPLA Concept Note I think is a really good source for you to be familiar with and a good talking point. And before we go to Luis, just two additional points, Martine, one is we've made a slide deck that's sort of a general one that anyone can take and use if you're doing a presentation, if you don't have that, we're glad to point you to it. The other is that we made a formal decision early on that from a communications standpoint, we weren't going for USA Today yet. That what we're trying to do in a way is to get our act together as a library archives, museums, technology, community, and really communicate internally. And I think actually a very important piece of that is communicating with public libraries. And Martine hosted a very important meeting last fall of public librarians and we continue to hear great feedback on how we can communicate with and through public libraries. But I think so far between now and April 2013 until we have something to show, we really are going to keep communicating internally and need, as Nate said, a broad effort to do that. But we certainly are thinking about post that time, what a more formal communication strategy to the American public would be. Luis Herrera. Yes, thank you. I just want to add to Martine's question. I think it's a very important one because we do get questions from various stakeholders. And yesterday in the audience and participation work stream, we did actually make some progress in trying to answer the why question. Why is this important? What does it mean to us to be engaged in? And so we're starting from just several concepts that we really haven't totally detailed out and flushed out, but it's the issue of quality, it's the issue of awareness and accessibility, focusing on the cultural heritage piece. All of those aspects are going to tie in to what you're talking to Martine about that messaging that I think we all need to, we understand the concept, but if we can articulate the message points, we'll have a much more kind of inclusive ownership, if you will, of DPLA. And Nate, I think you did a great job of explaining what we're doing in terms of the user experience, the segmentation, and the narrative that we need to continue, but it's all kind of evolving. And I think we made great progress. Yes, great. I saw a couple of hands up in this segment. We'll quickly bring some mics down, gang. Thank you for speaking into the mic. It will help with the web console. Hi, I'm Julia Mark-Shung. I'm from the State Archives of Mississippi. And I want to find out more about what kinds of institutional nodes you would like, because you have 50 of them ready and waiting. Good. All right. Lots of public content. Maybe a minimum of connection between you and Rachel Frick and Laura Marks and we'll take you up on it. But yeah, we'll keep the mic over here. Sorry. Yeah, please. My name is Janet Bradley, and I'm at the University of Arizona, and in Tucson. And I would like to sort of contribute what I think is a maverick perspective. I heard it partly in, from South Carolina, but not completely. My research area is in self-publishing, both POD self-publishing, and now in digital self-publishing. And I think that those two things are dividing differently, and I think that the two things are dividing differently in POD self-publishing. The real opportunity is local content, not just oral histories, but getting to people to write about their lives and experiences and having workshops. And I think that's a great fit for local content and then having places, as they did in South Carolina, to post that. But the other side of self-publishing is what I really believe is going to be a fairly rapid expansion of readers who buy self-published books at this point in time, but I think that's gonna change. I don't quite know how, but this is a whole, one of my short research studies shows that on Amazon's 100 top-paid books, they do this every day, and consistently, 35 to 40% are self-published. And I think that if libraries somehow don't come to grips with this, we're gonna find ourselves not supplying content that people want to read. There's also an opportunity here because the price points of these books are, it's really bimodal between the publishers, e-books, and the price points of self-publishing, which at the top are $7.99 and are mostly lower than that. So I just put that out. I don't know how it fits, but I want people to consider it. Thank you. We love Maverick Perspectives, among other things, and this was great. I also wanna do a shout-out since you work in a library school, you've had such great support from both library students and actually schools sending students here to this event. We're really grateful for that active engagement. That is, in many respects, a sign of great things to come for this project. Sorry, please. I just wanted to, this is Ivy Anderson from the California Digital Library. I just wanted to follow up on something that the General Woman for Mississippi raised, which is how states can become involved. And this is a follow-up to Susan's comment about the importance of local. And as Susan well knows, because she presided over this program in California, there are models like the local history digital resources program in California, which have, for a long time, tried to bring local content, digitize local content, and make it accessible in a broader way. And I think that that could be a very viable model for DPLA, something that has been developed as sort of end-to-end solution and could be replicable across multiple states. And so that may be a very, it's not quite the Scanabago approach, but it's maybe a version of that. Ivy, thank you. And we take huge, huge inspiration from what you've done and what's happened in Massachusetts and a variety of other models that I think we'll build on. There's a, if we can head to the back there. I see Emily, please go ahead. Hi, this is the Praveen Madan again. The bookstore guy who's trying to say, well, the bookstores. There's two stakeholder groups that I haven't heard a lot of mention about as I've gotten to know DPLA and I'm hearing all of you guys talk. So leaving bookstores aside that I've already made my pitch for, those two stakeholder groups are, one is publishers, book publishers, and I'm curious to hear what kind of response and reactions are you guys getting from book publishers as you're building this. And the second one, again, very important stakeholder group is writers. People who write books. I mean, there's a significant crisis in the writing community. And I'm talking about writers who don't have day jobs at libraries and universities like many of you do. People who used to depend on either book advances for generating an income or doing magazine and newspaper writing to generate, basically earn a living. There's a crisis because there's an expectation that you should now just be writing for free. People are going on food stamps and getting jobs at cafes, at baristas. These are professional writers with the literature degrees and journalism degrees because they don't know how to earn a livelihood anymore. So what are you guys doing to reach out to publishers and to writers and make them part of this thinking? Maybe if you wouldn't mind handing the mic down to a professional writer here in Dorn Webber. But I was going to answer just, okay, I'm glad we take it. I'm trying to spread the wealth here of the responses. We've been very open arms toward both publishers and writers in many respects. I think that there, as you know, both of these communities are struggling with their strategy at this moment. We would love more engagement from the publishing community. And we've had, I see Margie Avery from MIT Press who's been very, very active on the university presses have been very much engaged. We have had a number of the larger publishers participate at various points. I think there's a sense of paying attention to what's going on, but not yet jumping in with two feet to the extent that we can do that collaboratively. Absolutely, that's something we deeply welcome. I don't think we're gonna be able, however, to be all things to all people in this project. And I think we do have to solve for problems that we can. We wanna do it though in a way that's as inclusive as possible. So that is as warm a welcome as we could possibly imagine. And we see this as an ecosystem of production of information and creation and reuse as well as long-term preservation and so forth. So we see the connection there. It hasn't been the community that has been most jumping up and down to participate, although there's certainly been some participation in the sense of paying attention. Emily, yes? Yeah, I was just gonna respond to the last question that was asked about nodes and contributing. So we are actually getting ready to release a survey as soon as this DPLA West wraps up. And those of you who are actually involved in collaborative digitization run organizations like CDL, other kinds of statewide or collaborative projects, please respond to that survey. You'll see it come out. We're gonna try to put it out widely so that we can begin to identify all of these collaborative projects that exist and discuss the possibility of you being these nodes or these content aggregators to provide content. So look for that survey. Thank you so much. Other comments? Thank you, sir. Todd Robbins, I'm a library student. Awesome. I have a question about, so as we're working through kind of the balance between a repository and an aggregator, the discussion of what is the baseline of licensing? So we have creative commons and the Open Knowledge Foundation that has open definition and various standards for open data on the web. Is, do we see the DPLA as something that hosts open content only but then points to other licensed material? Or is it, I mean, what are some of the perspectives on that that you haven't been too involved with the content? It's a great question. And I think there are multiple perspectives still on exactly that topic. So in terms of expectation setting for April 2013, we're gonna be working with public domain content for starters in part because that defers some of the harder questions but also in part because we know for demonstration purposes we can do it. We have a commitment to know new restrictions through this process. So if something is digitized through an IMLS grant that supports somebody doing it or the DPLA directly, there won't be new restrictions. But I think there are open questions and this is one of the reasons that we're toggling a bit between these two, to the extent that something comes with some restrictions, would we be able to ingest that effectively into the DPLA or not? I think that remains one of these hard and good questions and a great one to have input from library students, among others. Mackenzie, I don't know, this is something you've given a lot of thought to in a variety of contexts. Do you wanna address it at all? I think you as a lawyer are much better called. You're great. I like to speak about that. With great caution, you see. Yeah, yeah. That's great. Any other last seven seconds questions? Yes, all right. Hi, I'm Emily. I'm from Your Future Library. Awesome. Yourfuturelibrary.com. And I was just wondering, with local content specifically which has already been discussed, local history content, that kind of thing, I was wondering who will kind of be the caretaker of it, who makes people aware that it's there, because right now usually is someone in the local community who does that, who knows about it, who knows what records are available and often they're so obscure. You wouldn't think of them unless you already knew that they were there. So I'm curious about who will do that, especially say, I don't know, 50 years in the future or something. I know that that's quite distant, but I guess especially as those things go more and more online and won't be passed down. How do you kind of imagine that happening in the present and future? It's a totally brilliant question. Actually, I think it's a great one to end with. Would you like someone to answer it, Maura? I was gonna answer, but please bring it down. But we've got a mic. I can answer on behalf of the archival community, but this is what archivists have been doing for decades is appraising content. But it depends on the users, it depends on the context. And I think that's why we all have to talk about this together. And it shouldn't just be one person's decision. I think... Does that answer your question a little bit? And just to answer it from a DPLA perspective, I think the way we've thought about it is that it's a matter of redundancy on some level. And that's actually one of the things that's worked pretty well with the web too, to the extent that we could create a system whereby there are people who are locally collecting, adding metadata, being supported by the system and keeping versions, where we're also sharing things, perhaps in this reservoir that Carl is talking about, where we can ensure that it's updated in formats and so forth, supported by standards at the national level. I actually think that by working together, we may be able to put a few more great professional and non-professional eyes on exactly that problem going forward. So I actually think it's almost a nice metaphor for where we're headed for the project overall. We are at time here, but I wanna thank very much my colleagues on this panel. And to note just one thing that's crucial about this is that we have people who are working in the federal agencies, all of the big ones, and our secret weapon, as Susan Hildreth, let me tell you, she's amazing at having us, and it's absolutely been crucial for all of us. Thank you, John. But we also have people, independent technologists, working in all manner of places, and hardcore, fabulous public librarians who are crafting this project. And I think we all want more active engagement as much as we've seen from Mackenzie, from Susan and Nate, and have a wonderful lunch. We will see you back here at 1.30. Thank you so much. Good job.