Skip to main content

The Convergence of Curation

  • Reference work entry
  • First Online:
Handbook of Science and Technology Convergence

Abstract

Digital resources develop through a sequence of technical, economic, legal, and social steps. The computer problems have been solved first; the late Jim Gray once wished “may all your problems be technical.” From a start with text, we can digitize and store images, sounds, and even 3-D objects. The economic problems are still serious but less so as the processes of digitization and delivery become less expensive. Legal issues are currently at the forefront, but even for objects old enough to pose few copyright problems, we can see social obstacles to the convergence of cultural institutions. Libraries, museums, and archives all have their own traditions of collecting, cataloging, preservation, user relationships, fund-raising, and now Web presentations. We can expect these traditions to outlast the physical design of buildings and the physical forms of early digital objects. Users may hope for a seamless presentation of cultural materials, but social and organizational issues will slow the convergence of the institutions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 699.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 949.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Aihara H et al (2011) The eighth data release of the Sloan Digital Sky Survey: first data from SDSS-III. Astrophy J, Suppl Ser 193(2)

    Google Scholar 

  • Ahern T, Dost B (2006) SEED: standard for the exchange of earthquake data, 3rd edn. International Federation of Digital Seismograph Networks, Incorporated Research Institutions for Seismology and United States Geological Survey, Seattle

    Google Scholar 

  • Austin EW (1982) ICPSR: the founding and early years. ICPSR, Ann Arbor

    Google Scholar 

  • Baker G, Tenopir C (2006) Managing the unmanageable: systematic downloading of electronic resources by library users. J Libr Adm 44(3–4):11–24

    Google Scholar 

  • Berman HM, Westbrook J, Feng Z, Gilliland G, Bhat TN, Weissig H, Shindyalov I, Bourne PE (2000) The protein data bank. Nucl Acids Res 28(1):235–242

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cornell (1895) Cornell’s crew arrives. The New York Times, pp 1–2

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferrucci DA (2012) Introduction to this is Watson. IBM J Res Dev 56(3.4):1:1–1:15

    Google Scholar 

  • Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) (1998) Content standard for digital geospatial metadata., US Geological Survey, Reston, Va

    Google Scholar 

  • Feist (1991) Feist Publications, Inc., v. Rural Telephone Service Co., 499 U.S. 340

    Google Scholar 

  • Gorman M (2004) The concise AACR2, 4th edn. American Library Association, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Incorporated Research Institutions in Seismology (IRIS) (2014) IRIS at a Glance. IRIS, Washington, DC and Seattle, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson CR, Hendriks E, Berezhnoy IJ, Brevdo E, Hughes SM, Daubechies I, Jia L, Postma E, Wang JZ (2008) Image processing for artist identification. IEEE Signal Process Mag 25(4):37–408

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • JCDL. (Session moderator: Carl Lagoze) (2002) How worthwhile is metadata (Harvesting)? Joint conference on digital libraries, Portland

    Google Scholar 

  • Lagoze C, Van de Sompel H (2001) The open archives initiative: building a low-barrier interoperability framework. Proceedings of the 1st ACM/IEEE-CS joint conference on Digital libraries (JCDL ’01). ACM, New York, pp 54–62

    Google Scholar 

  • Le Boeuf P, Doerr M, Ore CE, Stead S (2014) Definition of the CIDOC conceptual reference model. Heraklion

    Google Scholar 

  • Markoff J (2011) “Computer Wins on ‘Jeopardy!’: Trivial, It’s Not”. The New York Times, 17 Feb 2001, p A1

    Google Scholar 

  • Myriad (2013) Association for Molecular Pathology, et al. v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., et al. U. S. Supreme Court, 12–398. Decided June 13, 2013

    Google Scholar 

  • Nash SE, Colwell-Chanthaphonh C (2010) NAGPRA after two decades. Mus Anthropol 33(2):99–104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • NCBI (2013) The NCBI handbook, 2nd edn. NCBI, Bethesda

    Google Scholar 

  • NSF (National Science Foundation) (2011) NSF data management plan requirements. National Science Foundation, Arlington

    Google Scholar 

  • VRACore (2014) VRA CORE, a data standard for the description of images and works of art and culture. Library of Congress, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Weibel S, Kunze J, Lagoze C, Wolf M (1998) Dublin core metadata for resource discovery. RFC 2413, network working group, Sept 1998. The Internet Society, Reston

    Google Scholar 

  • Wieczorek J, Bloom D, Guralnick R, Blum S, Döring M, Giovanni R, Robertson T, Vieglais D (2012) Darwin core: an evolving community-developed Biodiversity Data Standard. PLoS One. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0029715

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael Lesk .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this entry

Cite this entry

Lesk, M. (2016). The Convergence of Curation. In: Bainbridge, W., Roco, M. (eds) Handbook of Science and Technology Convergence. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-07052-0_83

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics