LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST Archives

ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST  July 2003

ARSCLIST July 2003

Subject:

Re: Long-term/preservation audio

From:

Bradleys <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

[log in to unmask]

Date:

Tue, 8 Jul 2003 11:02:16 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (80 lines)

Mike Richter and others have added some good comments to this thread
concerning my comment that something could be learned form considering what
Google does. My writing was subtle. I may not have even gotten it totally
myself. :-) 

When I noticed this thread there was a civil debate in progress over whether
we should try to save / preserve everything or whether we should just save /
preserve the best and most representative of everything. A counter to the
first idea was that the volume of the material available would make it
impossible. A counter to the latter idea (that we should preserve the best /
most representative) was that we might make the wrong choices.

Rather than making a lot of decisions concerning what sites are worthwhile
indexing, Google seems to index most of them and most of the words and
phrases in those. True, Google does not index sites blocked to it (many of
those I cannot access either) but for domains that it can it seems to index
them to rather deep page level. For me Google represents by analogy (not by
its actual function) one approach in the debate.

Here is the analogy: Google seems to me to be as successful and useful as it
is because it does not try to make value choices in what it indexes. If it
is there Google indexes it. (Goggle's ranking algorithm is a different
matter. Although important to Google, the ranking algorithm is not part of
the analogy. Anyone who only considers the first few of many Google hits are
letting the ranking algorithm choose what you consider and in some cases
will not be taking full advantage of what Google offers. In any case I
choose not to consider something being hard to find meaning that it does not
exist.)

Concerning the preservation of recordings if we follow the example of Google
if it is available then we save / preserve it. (It is an analogy, Google
does not save and preserve but through access makes things available. More
about that role of Google is coming up. The analogy is specifically on my
perception that Google does not make value choices. If Google does, then
consider a Google that didn't and use that for my analogy.)

It is easy to confuse Google as an analogy with the service that Google
performs, indexing. It is true that without a Google it would be hard to
access the information on the Web--it would be there but we could not find
it (much of) it. Similarly, if an attempt is made to save everything
initially we will suspect it is out there but will have no way to find it.
Eventually some way to organize the collection will be needed so that access
can be achieved. I feel we should not be impatient that we don't yet have a
way to organize it all because someday the capability will exist. But if the
materials are lost (were not saved / preserved) it won't matter.

About the objection that we cannot store all the information so we must
choose: It may be true that today we cannot store everything today in one
place. But if a myriad of folks save the piece that they have access too,
someday the pieces of the collection can be brought together in one place or
more importantly (and much more safely) all of it can be made accessible
from many places. The storage problems will be resolved in the course of
time. I vote to save / preserve all we can. I recommend that we do not to
try to cleverly discern and select only what seems important.

Some / many seem to have missed that I mentioned as an analogy. Some thought
I was suggesting that because of Google all we have to do is save / preserve
and Google can do the rest. That is not true, Google cannot do this and some
have mentioned this. Google can help archivists though: If each person who
has saved some things would put it on the Internet on a high level web site
(not too many layers below the main domain) today's Google would at least
alert others of the purported existence of the materials. (Other search
engines that do not eliminate indexing such sites for the reason that the
sites are not important can also provide this service.)

 Let's be aware of the search engines' limitations today (several have
pointed them out): The actual content of the saved material is not searched
by Google. Because the content of actual images can not be searched by
Google what Google does with images probably could be done with sound files
and video / moving image files. (My experience is that Google does not yet
have even a good database of all the Internet images.) The actual content of
media cannot searched by Google though (as I understand it, as I have
experienced it). Rather Google only deals with and indexes based on what is
said about the media content in the sites in which it is embedded, from
properties included with the media or by sites that link to the media.

Regards,
Ralph
July 8, 2003

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager