2010
DOI: 10.1017/s0307472200016618
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evolving archival interfaces and the University of Brighton Design Archives

Abstract: The University of Brighton Design Archives, strongly embedded in the research context of the university’s design practice and history activities, has participated in a number of collaborative higher education initiatives to digitise groups of material for cross-collection searching or in learning packages. Such project-based activities, common to many archives, may not reflect the catalogue hierarchies of the collections from which they are drawn, and consequently the full evidential value of their context. Bu… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(2 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
(4 reference statements)
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Partial or selective digitization obliterates the delicate relationships between items. Even when the entire collection is present, the search, tagging and cross reference capabilities which are among the best arguments in favor of digitization also result in the creation of multiple points of entry, generating "new contexts for textual, image and media records" (Monks-Leeson, 2011, p. 39) and inviting new perspectives on the material (Breakell, 2010). Many of these changes are unwitting and unavoidable functions of how digital environments work, but there has also been a more deliberate shift in the way archival institutions present information independent of both provenance and original order.…”
Section: Challenges Of Theory and Practice In The Fieldmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Partial or selective digitization obliterates the delicate relationships between items. Even when the entire collection is present, the search, tagging and cross reference capabilities which are among the best arguments in favor of digitization also result in the creation of multiple points of entry, generating "new contexts for textual, image and media records" (Monks-Leeson, 2011, p. 39) and inviting new perspectives on the material (Breakell, 2010). Many of these changes are unwitting and unavoidable functions of how digital environments work, but there has also been a more deliberate shift in the way archival institutions present information independent of both provenance and original order.…”
Section: Challenges Of Theory and Practice In The Fieldmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The research, however, indicates that scholars are not the only audience for archival collections-sometimes they do not even comprise the primary audience. For example, Breakell (2010) reported that much of the interest in archival digitization is driven by family genealogical research. According to Bantin and Agne (2010), students also make heavy demands on archives, with "large numbers of first-time researchers looking for quick answers to questions on popular topics" (p. 245).…”
Section: Processing Standards and Practicesmentioning
confidence: 99%