–  Arthur C. Clarke

And so it is with Google Instant, Google’s latest search engine tweak which, not content with showing you the top ten words based on the characters you have typed so far, Ajax style, wants to actually perform the search while you are typing. Yes really.

So, no sooner have you typed “a”, when Google Instantly returns 3,820,000,000 results, (in only 0.13 seconds!) with Amazon.com at the top. And second. And “Amazon.com” Wikipedia entry third. Actually Amazon.com is in every result on the first page.

No sooner have you typed “b”, when Google Instantly returns 75,400,000 results (0.21 seconds)  with Bank of America as every result on the first page.

About as useful as a one legged man in an arse-kicking competition and focuses even more attention on ranking on the first page of results.

Google are branding this as a psychic search, in that it knows what you are looking for. Actually, I’d brand this as a sidekick search, in that its not as useful as their hero product, just plain old regular search. What was wrong with that?

Its not magic, its annoying. I guess I could just turn it off, but its annoying enough for me to blog about after no blogging for months.

Smaller, cheaper, faster, better – The promise of technology. Isn’t technology meant to make our lives easier by streamlining workflows, eliminating manual processes and supporting our administrative, interpretative and educational initiatives? That’s the myth. While technology is often smaller and faster, the reality is that technology sometimes isn’t better (shock, horror) and it definitely isn’t the cheap option. Technology may not be cheap, but done right it is a great investment. However, technology done badly can be an expensive mistake and that gives many the impression that technology doesn’t work and is an expensive waste of time. As museum technologists we struggle with this image.

In our current financial situation technology can be the soft target when we’re looking at our budgets, a second-class citizen struggling to convey its true value. I sometimes see technology as the sporting equivalent of a benchwarmer – a dispensable player who can be removed from the game without affecting its result. It’s not.

Who’s to blame for doing technology badly? No point looking around at others, we are when we don’t do our due diligence in matching solutions to requirements, or worse, when we don’t even bother to do requirements because “isn’t it obvious?”, or even worser, when we use technology for technology’s sake.

I’ve seen it many times. Applications are often a substitute for existing (manual) processes, so when we look to bring in a new application we look to replicate the processes that we have in place and are unwilling to change our ways. Third-party applications are often the result of a distillation of processes from a variety of different sources and situations into something simple. Instead of using the moment when we select technology as a time to question how we do something, we look to blindly replicate our processes with something that wasn’t designed to be as convoluted as we’ve trained ourselves to be. Bringing in technology under these conditions is a recipe for disaster.

There are any number of reasons why technology doesn’t hit the mark, but a sure-fire way is not clearly identifying the purpose and goals at the outset.

I’m reminded of a quote:

Computers make it easier to do a lot of things, but most of the things they make it easier to do don’t need to be done.

- Andy Rooney, US news commentator

But technology done right is a bit like the definition of pornography – I’ll know it when I see it. And the epitome of “technology done right” is that its transparent – its there but you don’t see it, it presents no barrier to the experience. And if we’ve done our job right, it actually enhances the experience.

The two-day Technology, Interpretation & Education conference showcased the value of technology and discussed getting it right. From the MUSE award virtual reception (thanks Jack & Suzy and congratulations to all the MUSE Award winners), to the Art Institute of Chicago on Teens and Technology: Remixing the Museum to Stephanie Weaver on Creating a Social Media Strategy to the consistently engaging Nina Simon on Developing Tools for Visitor Participation. The conference featured instances where the disciplines of education and interpretation have been brought together, supported by technology, to provide an engaging experience that represents value: a thoughtful and resonant engagement with our audiences, or more specifically, a visitor’s thoughtful and resonant engagement with us. Instances where traditional ways of interpretation and education have been replaced by elegant and meaningful solutions that further our individual missions, not necessarily using cutting-edge technology, but the right solution for the job at hand.

Technology done right is a thing beauty and a joy forever – that is, until the upgrade. But as the Chinese Curse goes: May you live in interesting times. That is certainly true of the times we are living in. And in these times we are being asked to “do more with less” – and often the instinctive answer is some technology solution. But as museum technologists and as museum professionals we’ve been tasked with “doing more with less” for many years.

We have less, so let’s do less. I think its time to focus our time and resources and “do less with less”, but “do stuff that matters”, to quote Tim O’Reilly. Tim O’Reilly also talks about “big hairy audacious goals”, but see Mike Edson for that.

“Do Less With Less”: Museum technologists always want to say yes, they are particularly good at saying yes or rather, they are bad at saying “no”. In this time of financial and resource constraint, as technologists, as content developers, and as educators, we need to create a culture where its okay to say “no” if our goal is to wisely and judicially use our skill and resources to create lasting projects of value. To misquote, Rich Cherry, Director of the Balboa Park Online Collaborative: “Don’t half-arse, just say no”.

In the short story Runaround (published in I, Robot in 1942), Isaac Asimov came up with three fundamental laws that all robots must obey:

1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm
2. A robot must obey any orders given to it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law
3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law

I’ve come up with the Museum Technologist’s equivalent that I’d like to share with you – to make the point of doing less with less. So for us Museum Technologists, I give you the Three Laws of Museum Technology:

1. A museum technologist may not implement a technology solution that is inappropriate, uneconomic, unsustainable, unproductive, inelegant, inflexible, a closed architecture or not based on standards
2. A museum technologist must obey the opinions and decisions of a museum non-technologist except when such opinions and decisions conflict with the first law
3. A museum technologist must protect his own existence as long such protection does not conflict with the First and Second law

So, what is an inappropriate technology solution? Well, I talked about that one: not matching solutions to requirements and doing technology for technology’s sake.We technologists have, what I like to refer to as the shiny gadget gene, we see others doing something cool and there is an overwhelming urge to emulate it. Or we see others with some success and we want to do that very same thing. We are a culture of emulation, but we have to be careful that we emulate for the right reasons. We jump on the bandwagon, without thinking whether we should be on it or even sometimes thinking about where it is going. The early institutional websites were a great example of this, but now I hope we’ve individually figured out why we do all have a website. I worry that our current social networking efforts are similarly inclined. Are you clear why your institution has a Facebook page and what the plan is? Are you clear why you are capturing User Generated Content on your website, and what the plan is? Technology for technology’s sake is not doing “less with less”, its doing “more with less”. And most importantly, it violates my first law.

What about uneconomic? We have to be careful of not buying into the myth that replacing something with a technological solution is the cheap alternative, or that technology is in itself, “cheap”. In our world there is rarely an immediate return on our investment and thinking that is the case, is a problem. Technology is an ongoing investment and trying to do it on the cheap, for example selecting technology based on relative cost and ignoring the requirements (assuming you did some), will result in tears before bedtime. Unquestionably, technology can support us in our mission, help us build engaging interpretive and educational solutions, but it requires investment and commitment from the highest levels in our institutions and the returns are not hard cash, but are hopefully feet through the door, greater access to our content and meeting our missions.

And let’s not forget that Open Source Software is as free as a free puppy: no upfront cash, but years of scooping poop. Just because Social Media is cheap and easy (is it really?) should we be doing it? There is an important distinction between “cheap” and “economy”. Done wisely and judiciously, technology can be a great economy, saving time and resources over the long term. No doubt that some technology solutions absolutely can be cheap and can be a “financial economy”, but our returns on investment are about meeting mission, sustainability, preservation and access, which by their very nature, play out over the longer term. Doing “less with less” means being crystal clear that what you are about to do clearly addresses these mission-related goals.

To do less with less is to focus on the things that are core to our institutional mission, things that are being done for the right reasons which everybody is clear about, and are done in a way that maximizes resources and finances. We should plan for flexibility because we don’t know where this “thing” is going; we should plan for scalability because we don’t know how big this “thing” might get; we should use standards because we want to play and share in a much bigger arena; we should collaborate and stop trying to re-invent the wheel. And most importantly, we should address the long term – the sustainability of the things we’ve created for our institutions after we’ve moved on.

Doing less with less may also extend to how you structure your workforce. Here at the Getty we reorganized departmentally to recognize that there functional areas that shouldn’t change – such as content development – the way we interpret our collections, but there are areas that will change – how we brand our content and how we deliver it. How does doing “less with less” fit into a world where new technologies and platforms are constantly emerging? If you know something will change, at least you can plan for it with modularity in hardware, software, people or resources.

In these “interesting times”, your take on doing “less with less” may be different. Maybe “doing less with less” is to do something that creates a revenue stream, or to do something purely because its high-profile, or even to do something that is in fact technology for technology’s sake – a one-off, no-holds-barred, shiny-gadget project. Far be it from me to judge. Essentially, “doing less with less” it is to be thoughtful and appropriate in how you conduct your business and how you support and deliver your interpretive and educational goals under the banner of your mission.

PPT available on slideshare here.

I get to see a lot of resumes in the course of my job. And I mean a lot. Every posting we do gets around 200 submissions and its clear to me that the problem isn’t so much the resumes themselves, its that people don’t think about what’s going on in the institution and the fact that they’re entering a process. They appear to have this impression that it starts and ends with them writing a good resume. It doesn’t and when the hiring manager opens your resume, there isn’t a heavenly chorus, the business of the museum does not temporarily halt while your literary work of art is reviewed and the hiring manager does not immediately reach for the phone to secure your employment.

For my session, I talked about the process: The Position, the Posting, the Resumes, the Short List, the Phone Call, the Interview, the Offer and particularly the thing that everyone has trouble with – salary negotiation.

But before all that I talked about career and salary gradients. The truth is that nobody else is concerned about your career except you. There aren’t many people for whom this is not true. To progress requires action on your part and you will likely have a steeper career and a steeper salary gradient if you change institutions rather than staying at the same one for your entire career. This is because institutions are normally constrained to policy and guidelines for internal staff promotions and promotional increases, not so when hiring from outside.

A couple of thoughts surrounding getting promoted. Any job has what I like to think of as height and width. If your boss gives you more of the same work, that makes your job wider and that is not a reason to get promoted. However if he gives you work that requires more independent decision-making, more authority and responsibility, like supervising someone, that makes your job taller and is an opportunity for promotion, but there are some caveats: the majority of your job is taller; there is a valid reason why your department needs a higher level function, there is budget to support it. Sadly, doing the same job for 10 years is not a reason to get promoted, because essentially you are doing the same job. It all boils down to communication, ask your boss what you need to do to get a promotion. If you don’t ask, you’ll never know and if you don’t like the answer, time to move on or suck it up.

So, resumes. Your resume is metadata about you, it should be a work in progress, update it yearly to adjust some dates or add significant accomplishments – do it when you have a performance review or on your hire date. Keep it short, 1 page if possible, 2 max, unless your job requires a C.V, e.g. a list of publications, exhibitions, etc. Think of your resume as a reference tool for your next employer – simple to use and easy to understand. Its about you, so it should start with your name and a summary that captures the essence that you want to convey.

In the workshop we had a discussion about whether or not to start with an objective or summary. I’m in favour. If your resume starts with your education, the first thing I read about you is information than might be 10 or 15 years old – that’s not a good place to start. Starting with a summary or objective frames the rest of the resume, this is particularly important if you’re trying to switch careers, or you’re going for a job that doesn’t immediately follow from your skill and experience.

I encourage people to read Malcolm Gladwell’s Blink, which is an excellent book but could just as easily have been published as a pamphlet, or possibly even a quote. It essentially says, people make a judgement within a few seconds and once that judgement is made, its hard to ignore. Resumes are the same, the very first thing on the resume and the very first sentence in each job description, sets the expectation for what follows. And nothing frames a resume like a cover letter which is a one page narrative about you and why I should be interested in you. Some advice, be very careful using humour – if in doubt, leave it out.

Verbs are crucial in a resume and they should match the job posting. Here’s a trick: underline the verbs in the job posting that you’re applying for and then underline the verbs in your resume. For example, if the posting says lead, manage, direct, create, develop and assign, the verbs in your resume should be similar – worked with, liaised with, helped with, oversaw are not the same. They are very defensive phrases and immediately set an expectation of your (lack of) skill and experience.

So what’s all this nonsense about process that I wanted to talk about? The process starts with the posting and a fair amount of time has likely been spent expertly crafting it – all the information is in there, so read it carefully and read between the lines. Does “sense of humour” mean a wacky boss like David Brent, a stressful job or barely acceptable working conditions? Obviously, it could mean we’re a fun-loving group of people, but you never know.

As a hiring manager, I deal in resume bulk. When you apply for a job, you’re one in a few hundred, your goal is to be that one. The first step in my process is to generate a short list, which means elimination. I’m not looking for that great resume, I’m looking for reasons to remove you from the pile. Approximately one quarter of resumes can be eliminated due to typos and mistakes. Triple check your resume and cover letter and then get someone to read it, carefully. If the job you’re applying for requires an attention to detail and you haven’t attended to the detail, you’re not right for this job. Another quarter are usually insufficiently qualified or lack appropriate experience – college graduates applying for a job requiring 5 years’ experience. I can normally cut a resume list in half without even reading your resume, just your cover letter.

If you get to the interview, you’re goal is to make the interviewer “see you” in the job. According to Malcolm Gladwell, the interviewer has likely made a decision before you’ve even sat down. Consider the interview process. If you have a number of interviews with different people, your goal is to ensure that they physically have something about you, because when they have interviewed the short list of candidates they will meet to discuss and compare notes. No notes, no you, no job. Give them a takeaway, something more than your resume. Nothing does it like a personal note to go in your file – maybe buy it from the museum store. Remember that interviewing with an HR person will be totally different than interviewing with a curator or educator. One does it professionally, the other is an amateur and does it as infrequently as possible and is probably as nervous as you.

I did two workshops and both times we got into a discussion about gender. I can fairly accurately distinguish between male and female resumes and cover letters. It won’t surprise you to learn that male’s are shorter, direct and make more sweeping statements about their experience, they use bold verbs to describe their activities, this makes them appear more authoritative as candidates. Female’s are more descriptive and there’s more of an effort to accurately describe their roles in different jobs. This can come across as defensive.

There is definitely a difference in how males and females approach salary negotiations. Males enter the negotiation to win, females enter to come to an agreement – its a subtle but meaningful difference. Again, think about the process and who’s making you the offer. Is the professional making the offer or the amateur? Don’t be afraid to negotiate, but have an explanation about why you’re asking for a particular amount – kids and mortgage don’t work, they are not my problem. Once a group of people have made a decision and you are the top candidate, no one wants to settle for second best. If you can’t negotiate on salary, try other things, pay review after six months, vest after 1 year, relocation expenses, signing bonus, &c.

Moving job should be an improvement, a step forward either financially, in quality of life or experience.

As a final thought, we live in uncertain times, and I’ve been “encouraged to move on” twice, once with extreme prejudice. After the seven stages of grief, both were excellent opportunities for me to advance. If you’re in that situation, its what you make of it.

As usual, I found a quote:

Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work. – Thomas A. Edison

Here’s the handout from my workshop.

Click here to see the re-designed gallery.

A focal piece of the sculpture and decorative arts galleries is an extraordinary collector’s cabinet from Augsburg, Germany, which represents the 17th-century desire to gather and order knowledge. Cabinets such as this, along with items of natural, artistic, and intellectual interest originally kept within, are essentially forerunners of today’s museums.

Although it isn’t known what was kept in this cabinet, its many surfaces are richly decorated. This interactive presentation—also available in the gallery near the cabinet itself—enables you to discover the piece’s many surprises.

Click here to interactive with the cabinet.

But that’s not the coolest thing. The coolest thing would be this:

Instructions can be found here.

Shameless plug, I know. Sorry.

- Fred Allen

(You’re impressed I have a quote about conferences, huh?)

And so it goes as we approach another AAM conference, this year hosted in my home town. I was trying to decide if this was a good thing or a bad thing. Traditionally I have blatantly flouted any session preparation deadlines, preferring instead to use the flight for some much needed me-time in gathering my thoughts for any presentations. Not so this year, which is why I’m not presenting on any sessions. No flight? No Presenting? That’s my New Rule.

OK, technically that’s a lie, I’m doing a couple of Career Cafes, and now that I’m self-important, I have lots of meetings. Oh and there’s one other thing…

So if a conference is a group of people who can do nothing, what we need is an Un-Conference so that we can do something. Well, guess what?

<shameless_pitch interest=”self”>

On Sunday, May 23, 2:45pm – 5:30pm there is a session Jump Start Digital Work in Your Institution: An Interactive Planning Session. Its a double session that pairs participants with teams of Web and New Media experts to work through issues of starting and completing real-world technology projects and Web 2.0 initiatives. Attendees can get help with current digital projects and potential future ideas.

</shameless-pitch>

In the same way that movie stars only need referring to by their first name (Denzel, Sly, Arnie, &c), you’ll be able to get some face time with the giants of the museum technology world with the likes of Bruce, Nancy, Rich, Herminia, Mike… (OK, this is where my metaphor breaks down…)

In the same way that movie stars only need referring to by their second name (Crowe, Hanks, Streep, &c), you’ll be able to get some face time with the giants of the museum technology world with the likes of Edson, Gordy, Iannacone, Leventhal, Mouw, Portway, Sarraf, Sasaki, Sparrow, Spiess.

Its the museum technology equivalent of the upcoming movie The Expendables. (OK, bad choice of title, but you get my point, everybody will be there).

The two main inspirations for the un-conference are:

• To overcome the challenge of AAM session proposals being due 10 months before the conference start date.
• To get as much face time between conference attendees and experienced practitioners as possible.

The un-conference home page is digital-jumpstart.org

See the current list of facilitators here, but its growing.

The event is using the #djump hashtag and of course the #aam2010 tag as well.

Technology has its up and downs and sometimes we all need a shoulder to cry on. Technology is no exception and I’ve wept technology tears many times. But there’s one way to avoid technology-tears-before-bedtime, come and see the Expendables Clash of the Museum Technology Titans.

OK, too many movie references, but you are coming to Hollywood, Hooray!

Sunday, May 23, 2:45pm – 5:30pm, Jump Start Digital Work in Your Institution: An Interactive Planning Session

In the same way that exclusive clubs refuse entry to anyone without a jacket and tie, no visitors will be allowed into our museum without a smartphone and an unlimited data plan. We’ve leased out our Information Desk to Verizon to handle on-the-spot smartphone sales to account for those remaining few people who don’t have one.

We’re in the process of removing all the signage and wall text labels so a visitor will have to rely on their smartphone to get around and receive any didactic content about the works of art. In fact, we’re also going to remove all the works of art, but you have to go and stand where the work used to be in the gallery, guided by wireless triangulation, only then will we download the image and interpretive content to you. Now that’s interactive.

We’ve come up with some fantastic interactive educational games, largely based around Marco? Polo! and one called Where the F*** has all the art gone?

This plan has solved so many problems for us. Our carbon footprint will be almost zero because we’ll have no HVAC concerns keeping the artwork at a specific temperature and humidity, we don’t need any lighting since visitors will navigate in the dark using their smartphone as a flashlight, and it also means we can actually sell our entire collection and no-one will be the wiser.

Click here for more details about the project.

I used to get overwhelmed by email, but now I’m in control. To me, email is a game of tennis, someone serves me an email and its my job to get rid of it, either file it because its informational (un-returnable volley), reply to it requesting some clarification (baseline return) or answer it outright (overhead smash). The object is to get the email out of my side of the court – in business its called getting the monkey off your back.

My Crackberry allows me deal with email anywhere, anytime. Sitting on the loo is the perfect time to multi-task – is that a guy thing? Probably. If you ever email me and get a very thoughtful and considered response, chances are I answered it while, well, you know…

I’m in D.C. at an AAM Board meeting which is being held in the National Building Museum. (I’ve been elected to the board, but that’s another post…). When I used to work in D.C., I would pass this building every Saturday and Sunday when my regular Metro stop was closed. I never went inside, but its an amazing building. The interior is inspiring and there is an exhibition on Parking Garages, which is infinitely more interesting than its title would suggest.

Given that I love my Crackberry so much I was intrigued and excited to get an email a week ago from United (my preferred airline carrier) telling me that mobile check in would be available to me.

No friggin’ way… Yes, friggin’ way.

I couldn’t wait. 24 hours before my flight I logged into mobile.united.com, checked in, gave my email address (how come they didn’t know that already, given that it was they who emailed me?) and waited. Sure enough, an email arrived with the word Beta in large font at the top.

Uh oh. Not a good sign.

As I scrolled down the email, my excitement turned to disappointment. The three-step instructions were less than clear:

That’s Beta alright. Really? Nobody read the instructions? Undeterred, I deduced what the steps were and voila, what I thought was a QR code appeared on my mobile, but is in fact an Aztec Code. So much for standards, the airline industry appears to be almost as bad as the museum world when it comes to standards.

At LAX, I approached security, handed over my driver’s license, flashed my Crackberry like it was some kind of FBI badge and mumbled something about mobile checkin. The security officer motioned me to the laser reader, I waved my Crackberry over it like I was at the Self Service checkout at Whole Foods. It beeped an affirmative beep.

Friggin’ awesome.

Then there was a moment of confusion. You know that little purple ink stamp that they stamp on your boarding pass? No boarding pass, ergo no stamping opportunity. The security officer was genuinely perplexed. It was obviously less to do with security protocol and more to do with some OCD-based requirement on his part to stamp something. He tapped the desk with his stamp, which seemed to signify I was cleared.

So far so good, but I still had the airline’s “gate people” to deal with, which turned out to have its own problem, since they were not content to have me wave my Crackberry over their laser reader. In a similar OCD-based compulsion, I think she had to do the waving. As I handed over my Crackberry, either she or I inadvertently pressed right-hand “convenience” key, which turned out to not be convenient.

Given that I made it to D.C. you’ll know that the wave was ultimately successful and I embarked on a paperless flight. Friggin’ awesome. No more begging for the use of an office computer, no more paying the $5 minimum charge to log onto the hotel’s computer and then the 20c/sheet cost of printing, and no more tolerating that incomprehensibly designed boarding pass printing application that has sprung up in hotel receptions. Now that’s friggin’ loren ipsum…

Love it.

You know that at some point he’s going to mess it up and the most junior person there, y’know the one that actually knows the product, has to step in and save his arse. The easiest way to upset a demo is to ask questions that are off-script. That’s when you know how well the presenter knows the product and this is where I see a huge difference between men and women.

We all know that men can’t do two things at once. For us, talking and operating an application are mutually exclusive. Its very difficult, particularly if some client wants to deviate from the well-rehearsed script: talking stops while the application is manipulated; confusion ensues while the shift is made; suddenly the product looks clunky and difficult to work with.

Not so if a women is presenting: there’s an effortless shift; no break in narration; question answered; back on script; wow, this is a slick and easy product.

Face it guys, vendor demos should be women’s work.

A few years ago we went through a rather lengthy selection process for a significant software purchase, it came down to two products and it was a difficult decision. I remember that we made the decision at the end of the day and I called up the CEO of the company who was not going to get our business, to give them the tough news. She wasn’t there, so I left a voicemail.

When I came in the next morning, I had about half-a-dozen voicemails from her. They were virtually indistinguishable from a dumped girlfriend’s. It was freaky but hysterical. Naturally, in respect for a fellow professional’s lapse in judgment, I deleted them…

After everyone had time to learn them verbatim… I know in my heart that this was a relationship that would have worked… Etc, etc. There were definitely tears on the third or fourth call.

Disclaimer: Similarity to any vendor demo currently living or dying at my institution is purely coincidental.

I lost the accent battle with my two girls long ago: I say “tomarto”, you say “tomaydo”, etc, etc. They also say “like” way too “offen” and they say “way” way too “offen”. Totally. I live too close to The Valley to fight that battle. My attempts to sustain the Queen’s English in the Honeysett household fail miserably, although they both do an exceptional impression of Dick Van Dyke in Mary Poppins – “Gor blimey ‘guv, you’re a toff and make no mistake”. As digital natives, they have no digital accent but they’re no longer as cute as this digital native: Abbey. They were fascinated to learn where the word “dial” comes from, as in “dial this number” – the acid test for a digital native and I’m pleased to report that they are fluent in vinyl and turntables.

Despite my youthful looks, I don’t qualify for digital native status. I like to think I have no digital accent, although keeping up with my girls is increasingly a challenge. They’re constantly txting, yes they have phone, and with my mum which is astounding if you knew my mum – she is most assuredly a digital immigrant, to the extent of being a digital tourist (thanks Titus – love this phrase). On the txting front, I need help translating.

As the modern-day equivalent of the jive xnsl8r there’s an app for that (http://www.lingo2word.com/translate.php) which takes your compressed txt msgs and xpndz thm to smtng u cn undstnd.

It occurred to me that we have something similar for our website search. Its an assisted search that uses a controlled vocabulary of artist names’ to help you find what you’re looking for, if you happen to be searching by artist name. We refer to the process as a query expansion. This name is a classic example of the technology influencing the name, because really its performing a query refinement, in that its helping you refine your search. But the background process involves polling the vocabulary app and returning with a larger data set, thus the search query has been “expanded”.

Brueghel is a standing example that we use. Did you mean…? I need txt expansion on my Crackberry, so that I can actually read what my grlz are txting me but more importantly understanding those endless txts that each of them get from their bff’s. r they boyz?

You might be aware that the Getty is in the business of controlled vocabularies and so when it comes to people, places or things in the art world, there’s an app for that. Respectively: ULAN (Union List of Artist Names), TGN (Thesaurus of Geographic Names) and AAT (Art and Architecture Thesaurus).

There is a new kid coming to the vocabulary block, CONA (Cultural Objects Name Authority) currently under development and hopefully debuting next year. (If you search for CONA with our vocabulary-assisted search it matches Coene, Jacques – Cona is a legitimate variant name). When it debuts, CONA will:

…include authority records for cultural works, including architecture and movable works such as paintings, sculpture, prints, drawings, manuscripts, photographs, ceramics, textiles, furniture, and other visual media such as frescoes and architectural sculpture, performance art, archaeological artifacts, and various functional objects that are from the realm of material culture and of the type collected by museums.

If you’re really interested, there are plenty of training materials and resources on the Research Institute’s website in the use of standards, metadata, and controlled vocabularies. With a brand spanking-new publication on controlled vocabularies coming out shortly.

As we move towards a semantic and location-sensitive web, its resources like these vocabularies that will assist in contextualising information, albeit in the world of art history.