<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for Archives and Public History Digital</title>
	<atom:link href="http://aphdigital.org/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://aphdigital.org</link>
	<description>A collaboration space for the M.A. program in Archives and Public History at NYU</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 25 Feb 2010 21:54:29 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>Comment on Discussing the Archive by Discussing the Archive Series &#8212; March 3 Event : Archives and Public History Digital</title>
		<link>http://aphdigital.org/more/discussing-the-archive/comment-page-1/#comment-226</link>
		<dc:creator>Discussing the Archive Series &#8212; March 3 Event : Archives and Public History Digital</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Feb 2010 21:54:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aphdigital.org/?page_id=1362#comment-226</guid>
		<description>[...] Full schedule: http://aphdigital.org/more/discussing-the-archive/ [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Full schedule: <a href="http://aphdigital.org/more/discussing-the-archive/" rel="nofollow">http://aphdigital.org/more/discussing-the-archive/</a> [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Organizing Knowledge at Am. Studies Assoc. Conf. by Peter Wosh</title>
		<link>http://aphdigital.org/2009/11/08/organizing-knowledge-at-am-studies-assoc-conf/comment-page-1/#comment-67</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter Wosh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Nov 2009 13:55:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aphdigital.org/?p=1258#comment-67</guid>
		<description>Thanks, Kathleen, for a really interesting post.  I can confirm from my own participation on NEH review panels that encyclopedias (especially those with on-line components) are alive and very well, and they really do constitute an important form of public history and require many of the skills that public historians need to cultivate (solid scholarship, ability to communicate complex information in an understandable way to a broadly defined audience, and a balanced presentation).  I would also second Amanda&#039;s endorsement of &quot;Everything Is Miscellaneous&quot;, a really thought provoking book on authority and descriptive standards that most archivists in particular would benefit from reading.  Surprised that it has received so little attention in the professional literature.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks, Kathleen, for a really interesting post.  I can confirm from my own participation on NEH review panels that encyclopedias (especially those with on-line components) are alive and very well, and they really do constitute an important form of public history and require many of the skills that public historians need to cultivate (solid scholarship, ability to communicate complex information in an understandable way to a broadly defined audience, and a balanced presentation).  I would also second Amanda&#8217;s endorsement of &#8220;Everything Is Miscellaneous&#8221;, a really thought provoking book on authority and descriptive standards that most archivists in particular would benefit from reading.  Surprised that it has received so little attention in the professional literature.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Organizing Knowledge at Am. Studies Assoc. Conf. by Amanda French</title>
		<link>http://aphdigital.org/2009/11/08/organizing-knowledge-at-am-studies-assoc-conf/comment-page-1/#comment-66</link>
		<dc:creator>Amanda French</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Nov 2009 18:55:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aphdigital.org/?p=1258#comment-66</guid>
		<description>Very interesting! You know, it never fully occurred to me until now that encyclopedia-writing is definitely a form of public history, a very important form. And I can see how the very existence of such a thing as a &quot;Queer Encyclopedia&quot; might be seen as problematic in terms of &quot;authorizing&quot; a field that in some ways defines itself against traditional notions of authority. 

In our Creating Digital History class, we recently read David Weinberger&#039;s great book &quot;Everything is Miscellaneous&quot; -- he&#039;s got a PhD in Philosophy, and went on from there (somehow) to become a bona fide Internet Guru. He&#039;s definitely contributing to the &quot;dialogue about organizing knowledge&quot; -- in a techno-populist and techno-utopian way that I must admit I&#039;m a sucker for. The argument of books like that would argue that Wikipedia&#039;s very lack of fixity (so often derided by librarians etcetera) is exactly what makes it more authoritative in this poststructuralist age, when we&#039;ve supposedly learned that knowledge isn&#039;t fixed.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Very interesting! You know, it never fully occurred to me until now that encyclopedia-writing is definitely a form of public history, a very important form. And I can see how the very existence of such a thing as a &#8220;Queer Encyclopedia&#8221; might be seen as problematic in terms of &#8220;authorizing&#8221; a field that in some ways defines itself against traditional notions of authority. </p>
<p>In our Creating Digital History class, we recently read David Weinberger&#8217;s great book &#8220;Everything is Miscellaneous&#8221; &#8212; he&#8217;s got a PhD in Philosophy, and went on from there (somehow) to become a bona fide Internet Guru. He&#8217;s definitely contributing to the &#8220;dialogue about organizing knowledge&#8221; &#8212; in a techno-populist and techno-utopian way that I must admit I&#8217;m a sucker for. The argument of books like that would argue that Wikipedia&#8217;s very lack of fixity (so often derided by librarians etcetera) is exactly what makes it more authoritative in this poststructuralist age, when we&#8217;ve supposedly learned that knowledge isn&#8217;t fixed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Political Tweets by Kathleen Hulser</title>
		<link>http://aphdigital.org/2009/11/05/political-tweets/comment-page-1/#comment-65</link>
		<dc:creator>Kathleen Hulser</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 08 Nov 2009 16:22:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aphdigital.org/?p=1186#comment-65</guid>
		<description>Should we pity the researcher of the future browsing these political tweets, or feel relieved that at least some written communications will still be written and saved unlike the vast majority of email info? Abundance and relevance, the promise and the pitfall of the future.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Should we pity the researcher of the future browsing these political tweets, or feel relieved that at least some written communications will still be written and saved unlike the vast majority of email info? Abundance and relevance, the promise and the pitfall of the future.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Political Tweets by Arian D. Ravanbakhsh</title>
		<link>http://aphdigital.org/2009/11/05/political-tweets/comment-page-1/#comment-64</link>
		<dc:creator>Arian D. Ravanbakhsh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 07 Nov 2009 13:37:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aphdigital.org/?p=1186#comment-64</guid>
		<description>Yes, I&#039;m the NARA archivist that can&#039;t sleep because of Twitter and frankly, almost all &quot;web 2.0&#039; sites. And the standard disclaimer applies - what follows is my thinking and not NARA policy.

To answer Julianna&#039;s point, I&#039;ll say that she&#039;s right about the need to archive Twitter and the potential interest in Twitter down the road. From a broader, government-wide perspective, the same thinking applies as well. For instance, most public statements (press releases, annual reports) from Federal agencies are generally appraised as permanent records. It&#039;s then an easy leap to translate that to the Twitter feed created by an agency - such as NASA or the CDC. It&#039;s a little awkward when the agencies don&#039;t own the servers that they are posting to, but as everyone has mentioned, tools exist that allow the capture of tweets. Personally, I&#039;ve used Tweetake to get a CSV backup and it worked pretty well.

Twitter is actually pretty straightforward on both the appraisal and the technology side. Where it gets more difficult is where the content is not as easy to appraise, let alone capture - think Facebook. That&#039;s where archivists can argue about appraisal theory and still not agree. Some agencies use FB as a place to aggregate their press releases and such. You can make the argument that if that&#039;s the case, then as long as the original press releases are captured in other places, then the content on FB is not a record. But what do you do with comments that exist solely on FB at that point? 

I&#039;m glad that students like Julianna are thinking about archival preservation on web 2.0 platforms. That bodes well for the profession moving forward. I also feel that traditional archival appraisal theory has to evolve as well. We&#039;re seeing the first steps of that evolution. Keep up the good work. Now, I&#039;ll go back to worrying about how to capture content from Second Life.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, I&#8217;m the NARA archivist that can&#8217;t sleep because of Twitter and frankly, almost all &#8220;web 2.0&#8242; sites. And the standard disclaimer applies &#8211; what follows is my thinking and not NARA policy.</p>
<p>To answer Julianna&#8217;s point, I&#8217;ll say that she&#8217;s right about the need to archive Twitter and the potential interest in Twitter down the road. From a broader, government-wide perspective, the same thinking applies as well. For instance, most public statements (press releases, annual reports) from Federal agencies are generally appraised as permanent records. It&#8217;s then an easy leap to translate that to the Twitter feed created by an agency &#8211; such as NASA or the CDC. It&#8217;s a little awkward when the agencies don&#8217;t own the servers that they are posting to, but as everyone has mentioned, tools exist that allow the capture of tweets. Personally, I&#8217;ve used Tweetake to get a CSV backup and it worked pretty well.</p>
<p>Twitter is actually pretty straightforward on both the appraisal and the technology side. Where it gets more difficult is where the content is not as easy to appraise, let alone capture &#8211; think Facebook. That&#8217;s where archivists can argue about appraisal theory and still not agree. Some agencies use FB as a place to aggregate their press releases and such. You can make the argument that if that&#8217;s the case, then as long as the original press releases are captured in other places, then the content on FB is not a record. But what do you do with comments that exist solely on FB at that point? </p>
<p>I&#8217;m glad that students like Julianna are thinking about archival preservation on web 2.0 platforms. That bodes well for the profession moving forward. I also feel that traditional archival appraisal theory has to evolve as well. We&#8217;re seeing the first steps of that evolution. Keep up the good work. Now, I&#8217;ll go back to worrying about how to capture content from Second Life.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Political Tweets by Amanda French</title>
		<link>http://aphdigital.org/2009/11/05/political-tweets/comment-page-1/#comment-63</link>
		<dc:creator>Amanda French</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Nov 2009 22:29:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aphdigital.org/?p=1186#comment-63</guid>
		<description>I&#039;ve used Twapperkeeper before; it&#039;ll output RSS and tab-delimited text, but one major limitation is that it only archives things that are marked with #hashtags (Twitter&#039;s organic form of metadata).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve used Twapperkeeper before; it&#8217;ll output RSS and tab-delimited text, but one major limitation is that it only archives things that are marked with #hashtags (Twitter&#8217;s organic form of metadata).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Political Tweets by Jennifer Waxman</title>
		<link>http://aphdigital.org/2009/11/05/political-tweets/comment-page-1/#comment-62</link>
		<dc:creator>Jennifer Waxman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Nov 2009 21:56:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aphdigital.org/?p=1186#comment-62</guid>
		<description>As I recall, the LOC used the web crawler Heretix to archive the Sotomayor tweets. They explain the entire process on their digital projects page. Two other methods of archiving tweets involve other open source applications. One is called TheArchivist. You can export into Excel and keep your searches ongoing as long as you open the search to gather every day. It will get tweets up to two weeks back or up to 1500, which ever comes first. Obvious problems are if you loose your connection or your computer crashes, you could obviously not have a &quot;complete&quot; record of the tweets you are following. I tested it out during the Iran election riots to see how it works. It works, but the results should be further analyzed to determine how well it holds up as a born-digital record.

The other option is the Twapperkeeper, but I have less experience with that and do not believe it&#039;s as easily exported. Many folks dealing with digital preservation and web archiving are researching ways to archive web 2.0 content. It&#039;s a very new field and for obvious reasons, will be very important down the road.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As I recall, the LOC used the web crawler Heretix to archive the Sotomayor tweets. They explain the entire process on their digital projects page. Two other methods of archiving tweets involve other open source applications. One is called TheArchivist. You can export into Excel and keep your searches ongoing as long as you open the search to gather every day. It will get tweets up to two weeks back or up to 1500, which ever comes first. Obvious problems are if you loose your connection or your computer crashes, you could obviously not have a &#8220;complete&#8221; record of the tweets you are following. I tested it out during the Iran election riots to see how it works. It works, but the results should be further analyzed to determine how well it holds up as a born-digital record.</p>
<p>The other option is the Twapperkeeper, but I have less experience with that and do not believe it&#8217;s as easily exported. Many folks dealing with digital preservation and web archiving are researching ways to archive web 2.0 content. It&#8217;s a very new field and for obvious reasons, will be very important down the road.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Political Tweets by Amanda French</title>
		<link>http://aphdigital.org/2009/11/05/political-tweets/comment-page-1/#comment-61</link>
		<dc:creator>Amanda French</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Nov 2009 21:40:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aphdigital.org/?p=1186#comment-61</guid>
		<description>Thanks for being our first blogger, Julianna! I will say that I know that some archivists are kind of tearing their hair out over archiving Twitter -- I met someone at the recent MARAC who works for NARA who said that this kind of thing keeps him up at night. The Library of Congress did archive some tweets related to the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor, as I understand, but I don&#039;t know of anyone who&#039;s doing individual twitter feeds. 

I do know that right now if you want to archive a Twitter feed, you have to set it up beforehand -- one way it can be done is by subscribing to the feed with an RSS reader such as Google Reader and then outputting the feed as plain text.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for being our first blogger, Julianna! I will say that I know that some archivists are kind of tearing their hair out over archiving Twitter &#8212; I met someone at the recent MARAC who works for NARA who said that this kind of thing keeps him up at night. The Library of Congress did archive some tweets related to the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor, as I understand, but I don&#8217;t know of anyone who&#8217;s doing individual twitter feeds. </p>
<p>I do know that right now if you want to archive a Twitter feed, you have to set it up beforehand &#8212; one way it can be done is by subscribing to the feed with an RSS reader such as Google Reader and then outputting the feed as plain text.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
