Library of Congress

Introduction. Digital tools have become ubiquitous in the process of music composition and documentation of composers’ lives and careers. This material and subsequent scholarship are at risk due to the obsolescence of hardware and software, fragility and variety of digital file formats, media prone to degradation. This paper presents survey results on composers’ process and knowledge of preservation practices. Method. The survey was designed in GoogleForms and distributed through email to music theory and composition faculty at Big10 universities, major conservatories, and professional organization listservs. The survey assessed compositional workflows and respondents’ knowledge and implementation of preservation practices through quantitative and free-response qualitative questions. Analysis. The survey generated qualitative data, examined thematically; quantitative responses were analysed for trends. Results. The results demonstrate a need for a central, open resource to guide composers through implementation of preservation practices to ensure longevity of their work. Conclusion. This survey is the first to bridge the disjunction between composers’ creative process and preservation practices. Results illustrate wide usage of digital tools and proprietary file types and indicate a concerning lack of preservation knowledge. It will inform a toolkit that offers guidance on long-term preservation, to bring composers into confident stewardship of their creative legacies.

Often the perspective of heritage science can seem opaque, with the perception of science being only for “scientists”. The fairly recent move to using the term “heritage science” is better known in Europe, but there is some confusion as to what this term encompasses. Heritage science refers to any of the multidisciplinary fields that contribute to the discovery, security, and preservation of a diverse range of cultural heritage materials. Many heritage collection items are complex multi-composites with convoluted preservation needs and degradation pathways. One of the areas that seems to be less well understood and appreciated is the capacity for heritage science to add new layers of knowledge to collection items, as well as the capacity for re-interpretation through this new information. Further areas of heritage science that support humanities include confirming provenance, the ability to link and reconnect separated collections, and the utilization of new technology to provide levels of security, an area of support greatly needed in the current environment for extensive trafficking of heritage.

ABSTRACT Advancing Critical Heritage Studies: the Next 10 Years, which focuses on the growth of the Association of Critical Heritage Studies (ACHS) since 2012, and the development of and challenges facing critical heritage studies in general. The special issue is a collection of short articles that, rather than present academic debates written in expected academic uses and conventions, offers a glimpse into the discussions that define the growing field of heritage studies today. Minimally referenced but rich in archival information, the contributions are records of past and present motivations, solutions, and oversights that drove the first ten years of work by different members of the ACHS Executive Committee, ACHS Chapters, and other contributors. As the issue’s editors, we offer these discussions as a companion to the growth of critical heritage studies, and to encourage both support and critique for the ways in which an organization navigates the complicated landscapes of heritage expertise.

PurposeThe purpose of this study is to offer a checklist that can be used for both creating and evaluating digital collections, which are also sometimes referred to as data sets as part of the collections as data movement, suitable for computational use.Design/methodology/approachThe checklist was built by synthesising and analysing the results of relevant research literature, articles and studies and the issues and needs obtained in an observational study. The checklist was tested and applied both as a tool for assessing a selection of digital collections made available by galleries, libraries, archives and museums (GLAM) institutions as proof of concept and as a supporting tool for creating collections as data.FindingsOver the past few years, there has been a growing interest in making available digital collections published by GLAM organisations for computational use. Based on previous work, the authors defined a methodology to build a checklist for the publication of Collections as data. The authors’ evaluation showed several examples of applications that can be useful to encourage other institutions to publish their digital collections for computational use.Originality/valueWhile some work on making available digital collections suitable for computational use exists, giving particular attention to data quality, planning and experimentation, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, none of the work to date provides an easy-to-follow and robust checklist to publish collection data sets in GLAM institutions. This checklist intends to encourage small- and medium-sized institutions to adopt the collection as data principles in daily workflows following best practices and guidelines.

Descripción de la ilustración que aparece en la portada del volumen 66 de Estudios de Cultura Náhuatl: detalle de la Pintura III del Códice de Huexotzinco.

Deliverable 13.2 for the WorldFAIR Project’s Cultural Heritage Work Package (WP13). Although the cultural heritage sector has only recently begun to think of traditional gallery, library, archival and museum (‘GLAM’) collections as data, long established practices guiding the management and sharing of information resources has aligned the domain well with the FAIR principles for research data, evidenced in complementary workflows and standards that support discovery, access, reuse, and persistence. As explored in the previous report by Work Package 13 for the WorldFAIR Project, D13.1 <em>Practices and policies supporting cultural heritage image sharing platforms</em>, memory institutions are in an important position to influence cross-domain data sharing practices and raise critical questions about why and how those practices are implemented. Deliverable 13.2 aims to build on our understanding of what it means to support FAIR in the sharing of image data derived from GLAM collections. This report looks at previous efforts by the sector towards FAIR alignment and presents 5 recommendations designed to be implemented and tested at the DRI that are also broadly applicable to the work of the GLAMs. The recommendations are ultimately a roadmap for the Digital Repository of Ireland (DRI) to follow in improving repository services, as well as a call for continued dialogue around ‘what is FAIR?’ within the cultural heritage research data landscape. Visit WorldFAIR online at http://worldfair-project.eu. WorldFAIR is funded by the EC HORIZON-WIDERA-2021-ERA-01-41 Coordination and Support Action under Grant Agreement No. 101058393.