=Paper=
{{Paper
|id=Vol-2084/short16
|storemode=property
|title=Challenges and Perspectives on the Use of Open Cultural Heritage Data Across Four Different User Types: Researchers, Students, App Developers and Hackers
|pdfUrl=https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2084/short16.pdf
|volume=Vol-2084
|authors=Ditte Laursen,Henriette Roued-Cunliffe,Stig Svenningsen
|dblpUrl=https://dblp.org/rec/conf/dhn/LaursenRS18
}}
==Challenges and Perspectives on the Use of Open Cultural Heritage Data Across Four Different User Types: Researchers, Students, App Developers and Hackers==
https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2084/short16.pdf
Challenges and perspectives on the use of open cultural
heritage data across four different user types: Research-
ers, students, app developers and hackers
Laursen, Ditte1[0000-0002-07386562], Roued-Cunliffe, Henriette 2[1111-2222-3333-4444] and Sven-
ningsen, Stig1[0000-0001-7949-0740]
1
Head of Department, Royal Danish Library
2
University of Copenhagen
dila@kb.dk
Abstract. In this paper, we analyse and discuss from a user perspective and from
an organisational perspective the challenges and perspectives of the use of open
cultural heritage data. We base our study on empirical evidence gathered through
four cases where we have interacted with four different user groups: 1) research-
ers, 2) students, 3) app developers and 4) hackers. Our own role in these cases
was to engage with these users as teachers, organizers and/or data providers. The
cultural heritage data we provided were accessible as curated data sets or through
API's. Our findings show that successful use of open heritage data is highly de-
pendent on organisations' ability to calibrate and curate the data differently ac-
cording to contexts and settings. More specifically, we show what different needs
and motivations different user types have for using open cultural heritage data,
and we discuss how this can be met by teachers, organizers and data providers.
1 Introduction
Open data in the heritage sector is a combination of the idea of openness in heritage
(such as public engagement and access) and the practicality of heritage data (in other
words the increasing amount of digitised heritage material as well as the dissemination
of this). GLAM institutions (Galleries, Libraries, Archives, and Museums) throughout
the Nordic countries (as well as in many parts of the world) have made a considerable
investment in digitising the documents and photographs held in their physical collec-
tions and then subsequently providing access to these digital materials to a global au-
dience [1]. This online access to digital heritage material has meant a massive step to-
wards more openness in heritage across the world. However, the extent to which these
datasets are open for reuse on platforms and circumstances other than those provided
by the institution is limited by organisational policies as well as technological con-
straints. In addition, little is known about how the data are utilised by different users.
One of the biggest challenges when venturing into providing open heritage data
is to strike a good balance between data and interface. Not only in terms of how heritage
material is presented to the public but also in terms of how open data is presented to
potential end-users through the API. API or Application Programming Interface is an
interface that enables data access for the use in application programming. As with any
2
interface design an API comes in many shapes and sizes and each of the cases show
different needs in terms of interface access to heritage data. Another challenge is bal-
ancing the needs of end-users against the needs of institutions and data providers. Each
has a different perspective and the cases will illustrate some of the needs and potential
uses of end-users and in each case how this corresponds to the organisational perspec-
tive.
In this paper, we analyse and discuss from a user perspective and from an or-
ganisational perspective four cases where we as teachers, organizers and/or data pro-
viders have interacted with four different user groups: 1) researchers, 2) students, 3)
app developers and 4) hackers. We deal specifically with the challenges and perspec-
tives of the use of open cultural heritage data available as structured data as curated
data sets or through API's. The cases we will present illustrate the range of challenges
and perspectives that are currently a large part of heritage institutions work with open
data. Each case provides a different view of the challenge of balancing datasets vs.
interfaces as well as end-user perspective vs. organisational perspective. The cases
range across four different potential user groups of heritage data and will show how the
institution interacts with these different end-users as well as the challenges involved
with each.
2 User cases
2.1 Researchers
In spring 2016, the Royal Danish Library invited researchers to join a series of data
sprints in the exploration of digitized material related to the former Danish colonies,
eg. photographs, maps, census records, newspapers, and toll registrations. The library's
university lab helped organize the sprints and used their university networks for recruit-
ing approx. 45 participants. The participants had different skills, for instance some were
subject experts in history, others had programming skills, and some just had an interest
in combining and learning about using digital data in new ways. Most participants came
from humanities, fewer had a technical background and even fewer were from social
science. In turn, we as data providers and curators brought a variety of competences
(eg. in the archival material and in GIS and programming).
Some researchers came with specific research questions in mind, and oth-
ers with more explorative approaches. In both cases, the data was critically examined
and questions related to the data's reliability and trustworthiness sparked a continuous
dialogue with curators and data providers. In several cases, research questions were
reframed in an iterative process according to newly gained insights about the data. In
the same way, tools were tested and discussed among researchers and curators, eg.
methodological implications were discussed when analysing data with the tool Open-
Refine to reduce the complexity of data by clustering and merging almost similar data.
Researchers also had specific needs for working with the data, for instance some wanted
to work with high resolution files for visual exploration, so this was facilitated by the
library. The researchers emphasised the need to be able to search for material across
collections through the API. Furthermore, the data sprint showed the need to improve
3
the API documentation and interface. This motivated the library to further develop the
API with a how-to guide. In summary, the case illustrates researcher's continuous need
for knowledge about data and tools during a research process and the challenge for the
organization to meet unique and specific demands for original research questions while
at the same time providing a generic service.
2.2 Students
In spring 2017 the Department of Information Studies, University of Copenhagen ran
an elective course on open data (not only in heritage) for second year BA students. The
course included an introduction to political and ethical issues through for example cop-
yright and data protection legislation as well as practical exercises in using HTML,
CSS, PHP and JavaScript to transform open datasets into new applications. The stu-
dents met with open data providers, such as the Royal Danish Library, in order to gain
a deeper understanding of institutional issues in providing open heritage data. Further-
more, the students were invited to join a boot camp organised in order to kickstart the
idea generation and development process.
The course resulted in a handful of projects and prototypes developed in groups
which presented different types of open data in various applications. In terms of herit-
age material one project, for example, used data from the Danish register of listed build-
ings provided by the Danish Agency for Culture and Palaces in order to build an app
prototype for that uses principles of serendipity to lead users through the city of Copen-
hagen. The brief for the students was to use existing datasets to build new interfaces
and visualisations of these data. They were instructed to clearly define a target audience
for their app and could also include knowledge on system evaluation from other
courses. One of the biggest challenges faced by the students was not so much using the
data but rather understanding the content of the datasets through the API. The data in-
terfaces they wanted to use were generally speaking not very well documented, with
the exception of the Flickr API.
The students’ overall aim, in this case, was to pass the course exam. In order
to do this they had to produce a low or high fidelity prototype and discuss their use of
open data. However, they were not reliant on being able to access a well-documented
API as the discussion element of the course allowed them to also reflect over the chal-
lenges of using a particular dataset.
This case shows in particular the value of presenting open data in an interface that
provides well documented content. Flickr is a good example of this with very specific
methods for accessing data (fx. Flickr.photos.getinfo which returns information about
specific photos if it receives the photo id). At this point in time with open heritage data
at this early stage one of the best outcomes of this case was to get the students in the
same room with data providers. Furthermore, getting students to test and discuss open
heritage datasets is a prime opportunity to get feedback to data providers on the useful-
ness and usability of their APIs and data documentation.
4
2.3 App developers
This case reports on the use of digitised historical aerial imagery from the Royal Danish
Library by app developers, retrieved through an API. The collection holds more than
900.000 historical aerial photographs, which have been digitised and geo-located
through a crowdsourcing platform using volunteered geographical information (VGI)
approach, where users can geo-locate the aerial images. The analogue collection has
historically been intensively used by consultancy firms and government authorities to
screen for potential environmental hazards, such as soil pollution and landfills. How-
ever, such use has been expensive due to the high cost of manual retrieval of the infor-
mation. The first phase of the project concentrated on the island of Fyn. By 2015 more
than 95% of the aerial photographs from Fyn were geo-located, thus constituting a com-
prehensive dataset of historical aerial imagery for this area [2].
The collection is accessible through an API in addition to the crowdsourcing plat-
form. In January 2017 the Royal Danish Library was contacted by Geo Fyn A/S, a
company established by the municipalities on Fyn, to develop and maintain a jointly
operated Spatial Data Infrastructure (SDI) for administrative purposes among the local
authorities on Fyn (http://www.geofyn.dk/). Key personnel from Geo Fyn A/S used the
aerial photo API to harvest the coordinates and metadata, thus creating a GIS dataset of
points with metadata and links to the specific imagery. This layer was then embedded
on the Geo Fyn A/S data portal as well as a data layer in different systems of the various
municipalities, making the historical information instant available on screen. Although
only 5000 records could be retrieved pr. server request, this was easily navigated by
Geofyn by developing a small script. Geo Fyn A/S plans to make yearly reviews of the
data due to the potential adding of new metadata and adjustment of the geo-location by
the library's volunteers. The Geofyn programmers did not have any issues accessing
and using the API and did not need further documentation than was already provided.
This case illustrate that open heritage data, with sufficient metadata and accessible
through an API, can provide app developers from industry and authorities with access
to datasets, which can be used at low cost for developing new systems or adding new
layers to existing decision support systems. App developers from these sectors, gener-
ally have the technical skills to extract data through an API and thus probably do not
need a high degree of documentation in order to do so. However, their interested in
heritage datasets is probably limited to those that hold an instant and easily accessible
value for their operations, such as easily extractable location points and limited
metadata.
2.4 Hackers
Since 2012, the Royal Danish Library has been co-organiser of the Danish national
event Hack4dk. The event is an annual heritage hackathon with about 50 – 150 partic-
ipants in average, organised by major GLAM institutions in Denmark. Participants are
data providers, programmers, interaction designers, curators, etc. The outcomes of the
hackathons are usually prototypes, products or concepts. The event is free and takes
place during a weekend in autumn, from Friday afternoon till Sunday afternoon.
5
The goal of the event from the point of view of the organisers and data providers can
broadly be defined as exploring the possibilities and usability of digital heritage collec-
tions, as well as testing the limitations and digital infrastructure of heritage institutions.
At the same time, organisers break their monopoly of on creative use of their digital
resources. Participants typically engage in the event for networking, learning and hav-
ing fun. In their own words: "I'm here to have fun and do cool stuff", "I'm here to meet
fellow geeks and talk about common interests", "I'm here to network and meet new
people" [3].
While the process is facilitated by organisers, participants self-organise and work on
their own projects, and in ways in which they prefer to work. Two participants explain
the process in this way: "We are back this year because we have time again, and the
past years have been really, really fun. It's great meeting new people and work on fun
projects. We recently started our company with us two and another friend of ours and
we came the three of us together and most likely we will end up working together, but
we are open to ideas. At the moment we are just kind of exploring. First we are going
get some inspiration also known as beer and then we are going to improvise something
I guess." (video interview, hack4dk's facebook page).
The hackers in this case work on projects that do not necessarily have to end in a
product and engage in activities that test the limits of skill, imagination and wits. The
resulting products often are for fun. For instance, the winner project from 2017 was
connecting Tin toys from KULMUS with AR and QR codes. By using the QR codes
on the small blocks it is possible play with the toys without actually touching the objects
and making stop-motion-movies (see presentation video at goo.gl/mwRmio).
This case shows that sometimes the process, the challenge and the collaboration
is what counts. It shows in particular that from organizational point of view the data
must be easy accessible, self-explanatory and inviting – and even so, whether the data
will be used or not, is at the total mercy of the participants, dependent on their personal
feelings, tastes, or opinions.
3 Conclusion
In this paper, we have analysed and discussed four cases where we as teachers, organ-
isers and/or data providers have interacted with four different user groups: researchers,
students, app developers and hackers. The four cases illustrate the range of challenges
and perspectives that are part of heritage institutions work with open data. More spe-
cifically, we show that each of the four user groups have different motivations and skills
for using open cultural heritage data. These findings can be summarized in this table,
showing the user perspective, ie. users' motivation and users' technical skills:
Table 1. User motivation and technical skills among different user groups
Users' motivation Users' technical
skills
Researchers Gaining new knowledge Varies
6
Students Learning, pass the course Varies
App developers Make profit, development of own ser- Highly skilled
vices
Hackers Have fun, be challenged Varies
Researchers Gaining new knowledge Varies
In turn, different user groups' motivations and technical skills require the cultural
heritage organisation to curate its data according to specific user groups. These findings
can be summarized in this table, showing the organisational perspective, ie. data content
requirements and data accessibility:
Table 2. Data content requirements and data accessibility among different user groups
Data content requirements Data accessibility
Researchers Subject specific, unique data, trustworthy Varies (technical
data skills), Flexible (re-
search questions)
Students Data as training sets Varies, depending
on skills and learn-
ing goals
App developers Subject specific, unique data "Help to self-help"
Hackers Subjective data/dependent on personal Data should be easy
feelings, tastes, or opinions accessible/data as
mean to something
else
Data content requirements Data accessibility
Thus, successful use of open cultural heritage data is highly dependent on organisa-
tions' ability to calibrate and curate the data differently according to contexts and set-
tings.
4 Reference
1. Tanner, S., & Deegan, M. (2013, October). Measuring the impact of digitized resources: The
Balanced Value Model. In Digital Heritage International Congress (DigitalHeritage), 2013
(Vol. 2, pp. 15-19). IEEE
2. Svenningsen, S. R., Brandt, J., Christensen, A. A., Dahl, M. C., & Dupont, H. (2015). His-
torical oblique aerial photographs as a powerful tool for communicating landscape changes.
Land Use Policy, 43, 82-95. DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2014.10.021
3. Wang, Jacob R. (2017): Hack4dk: Hacking our heritage 2012-2017, presentation at
Hack4dk, Enigma, Copenhagen, Sept. 29.