Los Angeles County Museum of Art
Download the PDF version
of this file
Monday, September 21, 1998, Morning Session
1.3 Status Report
1.4 Members Web Site at members.amico.org
1.5 Public Web Site and Thumbnail Catalog at www.amico.org
1.6 Editorial Tools
1.7 RLG Delivery of The AMICO Library at eureka.rlg.org/amico
1.8 Report on Licensing Workshop
Monday, September 21, 1998: Afternoon Session
2.1 Rights Committee Breakout
2.2 Technical Operations Committee Breakout Report
Tuesday September 22: Morning Session
3.1 Report on the CIMI Dublin
Core Metadata Project
3.2 Users and Uses of The AMICO Library
3.3 University Testbed Focus Group Meeting
3.4 Annual AMICO Meeting
3.5 K-12 and Public Library License Development
3.6 Record Withdrawal Procedures
DO list for 1998/99
II. Process Evaluation Form - DRAFT
1. Monday, September 21, 1998, Morning Session
Jennifer Trant, Executive Director of AMICO, welcomed members and thanked
Graham Beale, Director of LACMA and his staff for hosting the meeting.
All in attendance introduced themselves and their departments; see the
attached list of meeting attendees (Appendix I). The west coast location
provided an opportunity for broad representation from both SFMOMA and
LACMA. Many different departments in museums were represented, including
computer services, education, curatorial, new media, publishing, and photographic
1.3 Status Report
All members were congratulated for their work in assembling and delivering
The AMICO Library on time. RLG has now made the Library available to both
AMICO Members and University Testbed participants. Their application was
launched on schedule.
David Bearman and Jennifer Trant reported on the status of AMICO. In introducing
activities to date they noted that a considerable amount of their time
in the June-September period was devoted to getting AMICO Membership Agreements,
Library Museum Agreements and Library University Agreements signed.
staffing will be decided at the Executive Committee meeting in New York
on September 28. David and Jennifer have been interviewing, and will ask
the Executive Committee to approve hiring, a Member/Client Services coordinator.
In addition, they will propose that AMICO name Brad Dietrich, who has
been working for A&MI on AMICO technical matters, as AMICO Technical
Director on October 1. In the summer, with approval from the Executive
Committee, Jennifer has accepted the title "Executive Director" and David
the title "Director, Strategy and Research" to explain their roles in
a number of grant proposals AMICO has submitted. Their formal relationship
to AMICO remains that of contractors. With Executive Committee approval,
Jennifer will be appointed Executive Director for the next eighteen months,
at which time the position will be recruited. Bearman will continue to
serve as Director, Strategy and Research on a part time, consulting basis
for the next 18 months.
was opened in July. Three new members (the Library of Congress, The Frick
Collection (including the Art Reference Library), and the Whitney Museum
of American Art, have been announced. Other members are expected to join
in September and to participate in building the 1999 AMICO Library. A
Press Release was distributed to those in attendance, and also will be
distributed at the Museum Computer Network Meeting.
ACTION: Members are
encouraged to invite their colleagues to join the consortium, and to
refer interested parties to David and Jennifer for further information.
1.4 Members Web
Site at members.amico.org
The work of AMICO continues to be carried out by its committees, largely
meeting in cyberspace, thanks to the Art Museum Network's hosting of
our password protected members' web site. All records of discussions,
drafts of documents, and decisions are posted to the AMICO members web
site. The members Web Site continues to expand in content and is (again)
in need of a cleanup, as our agenda progresses and we accomplish many
of the tasks we have set ourselves.
The committee pages
and committee discussions were reviewed and demonstrated. People can
subscribe, or unsubscribe, themselves at the bottom of the page of each
Hypernews discussion. Several aspects of the site were highlighted,
including the monthly reports filed by A&MI and Michael Shapiro
on their work for AMICO, that can be found on the Executive Committee
ACTION: It was agreed
that historical documents, and discussion threads of only historical
interest, would be retired to an archive, linked to the main page of
1.5 Public Web Site
and Thumbnail Catalog at www.amico.org
As well as maintaining a members' web site, AMICO has a public site,
where information about the Consortium is made broadly available. This
site includes AMICO Frequently Asked Questions, reports and documents,
sample records and the searchable thumbnail. The Thumbnail Catalog was
completed under contract by A&MI for AMN, and launched on September
1, 1998. It has since attracted regular comments from users, even though
we have not made a general announcement (except to AMICO members) of
its availability. [We learned after the meeting that the site had been
recognized by the Internet Scout Report weekly issue of September 18].
ACTION: Members agreed
to assess the search facility, compare it to that of the RLG application,
and suggest ideas for improvement of each using the comments button
on each site. Further work may be done on the interface.
1.6 Editorial Tools
An online record edit
facility that enables members to correct or add to existing records in
a web based data entry form
Since completing the searchable catalog, Brad Dietrich has focussed
on tools to help AMICO members make their contributions to the Library.
Tools in final testing stage (some demonstrated to the attendees) include:
A new record creation
facility for data entry of new records into an online form (for institutions
without collections management systems)
A term occurrence reporting
facility to allow each institution to see the terms occurring in any field
of its contributed records, in order to identify editorial problems
A file validation facility
to allow those exporting data to AMICO to test it for conformance to the
AMICO data specification and receive an immediate report on any problems,
field by field.
A field parsing report
and download facility to allow AMICO members to see the data created by
AMICO data parsing routines and to download parsed data fields
A contribution download
facility that enables an institution to ftp itself the latest version
of its AMICO records in AMICO import format (and possibly in some other
A data matching facility
allowing institutions to view the results of matching their records against
the GII vocabularies (AAT, ULAN and TGN)
In discussion, AMICO
members expressed their excitement over having tools for submitting,
parsing and validating data interactively. It was hoped that this would
allow individual institutions to clean up their data for 1998, and avoid
some difficulties for 1999.
ACTION: It was agreed
that these tools would be made available, with personal password control
for editing, on a link from the members site. We agreed on a mid-October
target date to have these tools ready to use.
1.7 RLG Delivery
of The AMICO Library at eureka.rlg.org/amico
Katherine Martinez, Product Manager for The AMICO Library and other
museum data for the Research Libraries Group, demonstrated the RLG application.
Each AMICO Member who has signed their Membership Agreement and AMICO
Library Museum License, and each Testbed Participant who has signed
their AMICO Library University Agreement now has access, either by password,
or by IP address security.
that the Testbed interface was a work in progress and invited continued
comment from members; she pointed out the "Comments" button in the interface
that enables members to contact RLG and AMICO directly. AMICO Members
thanked RLG for their rapid response on suggestions that have been made
In demonstrating the
facility, Katherine showed its ease of use and straightforward interface.
She emphasized the Options button (settings for each session), the Notebook
feature (a place to hold works gathered throughout a session), and the
advanced search capabilities created by the "Review" option which allows
a user to combine a number of prior searches to a highly sophisticated
Katherine was asked
about RLG's plans for the "product" and noted that while RLG was not approaching
individual museums, it did hope to add to the overall content available
next year by adding large collections, such as those offered by European
photo libraries, to the RLG image base products. AMICO would continue
to be identified as the source of all information coming from The AMICO Library.
1.8 Report on Licensing
Rachel Allen of the National Museum of American Art reported on the
seminar "Selling/Acquiring Electronic Information: A Dialog about Best
Practices", sponsored by the Society for Scholarly Publishing, and held
September 17, 1998 in Washington, DC. Alternatively presenting "rights
sellers" and "rights buyers" perspectives, the meeting highlighted the
need for a consistent approach to licensing digital information, and
stressed the difficulties that librarians have managing many different
licenses with different terms. Rachel's detailed notes are available
on the AMICO Members' Web site at http://members.amico.org/docs/ssp091798.html
Nancy Gibbs, Acting Head Acquisitions, N.C. State University Libraries,
who pointed out that electronic acquisition is much more complex than
book acquisitions; licensing involves more departments, such as systems,
legal, networking, training, all of which must partner for a successful
acquisition and implementation. Sarah Sully, Intellectual Property Licensing
Attorney, for JSTOR (an online journals project funded by the Andrew
W. Mellon Foundation) recommended keeping licenses simple, really clarifying
what is essential and removing the rest, and eschewing legalese (see
the JSTOR license at www.jstor.org). Sully noted that the International
Association of Library Consortia has developed a set of usage statistics
that JSTOR reports.
David and Jennifer
concurred with these points, noting that they had spent a considerable
amount of time both on the telephone and in writing with AMICO Members'
Counsels and with Counsels for the participants in the University Testbed
Project. A simplified AMICO Library University Agreement is going to
be essential to the success of the public launch of the Library.
Monday, September 21, 1998: Afternoon Session
The afternoon session was devoted to breakouts of the Technology and Rights
Committees. Each group met for approximately two hours, to discuss separate
2.1 Rights Committee
Decision - the AMICO
members will share texts of letters they are using to obtain rights from
artists. AMICO Executive Director Jennifer Trant will collect and review
these and propose common language to be included in future requests. Such
a letter could include a "multiple-choice' option, that included both
AMICO restricted access use and Member use on Web sites.
The Rights Issues discussed by the Committee, and reported to the group
as a whole at the end of the day, included:
Decision Ð the AMICO
Artists' FAQ will be distributed along with letters requesting permission
to use works in The AMICO Library. This will build recognition of the
project in the minds of artists. If other uses were requested in the same
letter, then FAQs for those uses would have to be developed by the Member.
The FAQ is available for download on the AMICO Members' web site at http://members.amico.org/docs/artist.faq.html
Decision - AMICO will
produce a list of contemporary/copyrighted works in the current Library,
by October 16. Members will review lists of artists who have given permission
to AMICO Members to include their works in 1998 by October 31, and propose
lists of those they would like to approach for the 1999 Library. With
this analyses in hand, it will be possible to coordinate strategies for
requesting rights, and possibly streamline them. It may be possible, for
example for a member to approach a rights holder speaking on behalf of
all AMICO members. It may also be easier for other members to approach
an artist who has already granted permission to one AMICO member.
Discussions among AMICO
members need to resolve a wide range of policy issues before AMICO approaches
artists rights organizations. Issues include whether to approach artists
for rights to controlled educational access (AMICO) at the same time as
public web access and whether to pay for access when license fees are
being charged. For example, there are differing policies in place in AMICO
Member institutions about the compensation of artists for educational
and commercial uses. This issue will be discussed further by the Executive
Committee at its meeting September 28, 1998. AMICO should explore possible
venues for sharing information with artists and artists rights organizations.
AMICO members will need
to anticipate the kinds of further rights requests that The AMICO Library
will generate. For example, we can assume that scholars are going to want
to request permission for scholarly publication of works from the Library.
AMICO members could consider streamlining this kind of request, through,
for example, a common on-line form, that went to each Member for processing.
The Rights Links in each members records are also critical to facilitating
reproduction requests. Members are asked to verify their links, and ensure
that they point to a helpful source of information for the end user (some
still point to a generic home page for the member).
Some members do not
have good information policies in effect for staff and others using licensed
electronic resources. The ACLS model policy was discussed (available online
at www.arl.org/newsltr/196/checklist.html) and it was noted that it covered
a broad range of issues. Jennifer suggested that Michael Shapiro might
run a workshop for AMICO members on developing information policies. This
was welcomed, and it was concluded that AMICO members could benefit from
model policies and help applying them, in a venue such as a workshop.
2.2 Technical Operations
Committee Breakout Report
Decision - the current
Data Specification, distributed at the meeting and dated September 1998,
will be the format governing submissions for 1999.
Issues discussed by the Committee, and reported to the group as a whole
at the end of the day, included:
It would be valuable
to AMICO members if Collections Management Systems could create an AMICO
output report which enabled members using commercial collections systems
to send their data, correctly formatted, to AMICO in a single command.
ACTION: David and Jennifer
will approach the vendors; members were encouraged to follow up by asking
their vendors for this function also. Vendors will be approached at
MCN and by mail. At this time, they are not being requested to provide
AMICO input capabilities (taking a files from AMICO back into their
system), but members who are customers of these vendors were encouraged
to ask for that as well if they felt it was useful.
Tools for online editing
of AMICO Library contributions will be very helpful. Documentation of
the online edit facility, the parsing routines, the data validation routines,
and the methods for downloading data from AMICO will be necessary for
members to use the newly developed AMICO tools.
ACTION: This documentation,
and individual password controlled access, will be available when these
functions are released, in mid-October, 1998.
ACTION: Members will
examine their parsed data and report any systematic parsing routine
errors, by October 31.
A draft of the Process
Evaluation form was discussed. This data collection is intended to help
AMICO redesign the data contribution process, if necessary and to allow
members to document their experience in the first year so they will know
how they went about it before starting the process over again. The draft
will be posted for comment. Members agreed that if they had documents
describing the workflow involved in AMICO data contributions within their
organizations they would share these as part of the process evaluation.
ACTION: Comment on
the draft by October 16. Revise form by October 21. Complete the Process
Evaluation by November 15.
Questions were raised
about XML, RDF, SGML, the Dublin Core, Unicode, and image practices and
standards. Each was discussed briefly.
ACTION: Members agreed
to post questions to the Technical Committee discussion where David
(and hopefully others) will try to provide detailed answers and lists
of links to follow for the latest technical reports.
The absence of very
many examples of rich multimedia in the library was seen as a barrier
to considering how we would want to deliver such more complex packages
of data in the future.
ACTION: Each institution
agreed to contribute at least two examples of a package of information
consisting of as many different types of data as possible, around a
work of art.
Issues remain in the
"clean-up" of the data already submitted to AMICO. While the online editorial
tools will be helpful, there are issues of policy and coordination that
need to be addressed.
ACTION: An Editorial
Committee will be created that will develop guidelines and best practices
for the application of the AMICO Data Specification. These include developing
examples of records with multiple creators, and other kinds of common
complexities. Each member will be asked to name a representative by
Decision: Data to be
delivered for the 1999/2000 AMICO Library will include all catalog records
for works submitted in both 1998 and 1999, as well as new images and metadata
records for the new works added to the Library. This resubmission of text
records is unlikely to happen every year. However, it seemed most efficient
this year, as documentation is being enhanced by all Members and many
records will have been changed or updated.
Decision New members
will make their 1999/2000) Library Contributions by December 31, 1998.
Founding Members will make their Contributions by February 28, 1999. In
both cases these are the deadline for the submission of all records. Early,
and ongoing submissions are encouraged to avoid the "last minute crunch".
Decision All members
will report the works to be included in their 1999/2000 contribution,
categorized by century and contry/continent of origin by October 31.
Tuesday September 22: Morning Session
Tuesday, September 22nd began with a delightful guided tour of the current
Picasso exhibit at LACMA (on loan from the Museum of Modern Art).
3.1 Report on the
CIMI Dublin Core Metadata Project
Robin Dowden of the Walker Art Center reported on the work of the Consortium
for the Computer Interchange of Museum Information (CIMI)
Dublin Core Metadata Project. AMICO discussed participating in this project
directly in the spring, but it was decided that since a number of AMICO
Members were also active CIMI members the WAC, the NMAA and the NGC could
also represent AMICO. CIMI has been testing the effectiveness of the Dublin
as a tool to aid the discovery of online museum records.
CIMI members have now
created about 300,000 Dublin Core, from the contributions of 14 institutional
participants. Robin will compare the map of the AMICO Data Dictionary
to the Dublin Core with the practices that are developing within the CIMI
project. She'll report to AMICO members on an ongoing basis, as the project
develops its "User's Guide to the Dublin Core for Cultural Heritage."
Robin noted that it is likely that DC will be a focus of CIMI activities
in the coming year, and that they will be following the work of the main
DC group on expressing the Dublin Core in XML/RDF. As David is on the
Dublin Core Policy Advisory Committee, he volunteered to keep AMICO members
informed of DC developments as well.
3.2 Users and Uses
of The AMICO Library
Member Use of the Library. Much discussion was directed at how best to
encourage the use of The AMICO Library within AMICO institutions. Of particular
interest was how each institution was planning to introduce AMICO to staff
not previously involved and what kinds of projects they would be encouraging.
It was generally agreed that if an academic institution nearby was in
the testbed, collaborating with academic users would stimulate museum
staff and that some individuals who are particularly likely to find the
challenge exciting should be encouraged to use the Library first, and
then their experience could be shared with others.
Members were asked to
share their experiences on the Users and Uses Discussion. The possibility
of developing a "demonstration script" that provided a generic introduction
to AMICO and good examples of searches that retrieve interesting results
was discussed. But it became clear quickly that what one group of curators
might think was an interesting result would not necessarily be the best
search for another group, so instead it was suggested that AMICO contacts
should work with their librarians to make searches that could connect
well to on-going concerns of the museum staff.
Some leading questions
were proposed, including:
Q: Why is The AMICO Library different from a CD?
A: Searching across collections; high resolution of these images; depth
of data; search functionality; no "authored script"
Q: How does The AMICO Library differ from searching on the public web?
A: Searching across collections; high quality of images; ease of searching;
of AMICO members were proposed by Peter Walsh to the Users and Uses
Committee in the spring. Members agreed to try to meet to work together
- in New York City, Minneapolis and possibly in California (statewide).
Susan Chun volunteered to organize the first of these meetings, in New
3.3 University Testbed
Focus Group Meeting
It was agreed that a Users Focus Group meeting should be planned for
the CAA/VRA meeting that will be held in Los Angeles in February 1999.
AMICO Users and Uses Committee members will work with Jennifer (and
possibly RLG) to establish an agenda and define a venue for this meeting.
In addition, a number
of user surveys are underway. These are building on those conducted
during the Museum Educational Site Licensing Project (MESL). MESL survey
instruments will be adapted to make it possible for AMICO to gather
longitudinal data about the use of digital images in university teaching.
These are linked to the Users and Uses Committee Page on the Members
3.4 Annual AMICO
After reviewing the responses to polling for dates for a spring AMICO
meeting, it became clear that trying to schedule a full AMICO Meeting
in conjunction with another meeting is not going to be possible. Specific
professions seem to go to each meeting. For example, technical staff
were at MCN; curators at CAA; and educators at AAM. One of the benefits
of AMICO meeting was bringing together all of these multiple perspectives.
It was agreed that
we would plan an annual full AMICO meeting each year, that would be
about 2 days long. At this meeting, changes in direction or goals would
be discussed and questions of policy addressed. The AMICO Board will
continue to meet in conjunction with AAMD (for ease of scheduling director's
The first annual AMICO
meeting will be held the end of May or the beginning of June, in conjunction
with the wrap-up of the University Testbed project. One day would be
devoted to Testbed issues and reports, and one to AMICO business.
3.5 K-12 and Public
Library License Development
The strong possibility that Indianapolis University/Purdue University
Indianapolis (IUPUI) would receive an IMLS grant was noted (it was since
announced that their application was successful). AMICO will be working
with this project to develop K-12 and Public Library Licenses for The AMICO Library. The grant proposal is linked to the Documents page on
the AMICO web site at http://members.amico.org/docs/imls.proposal.html
3.6 Record Withdrawal
An online form will be created to enable members to notify AMICO if
works have to be withdrawn fm the Library. This will be released with
the other online editing tools, in mid-October.
TO DO list for 1998/99
At the end of the meeting the group constructed a To Do list from the actions
they had agreed to during the meeting and a schedule of due dates. Included
were tasks assigned to the AMICO office and tasks for each AMICO member:
with member museums on strategies for approaching artists who have
previously given rights to AMICO members/AMICO or who are likely to
be approached on behalf of more than one museum. This strategy to
be worked out with the Executive Committee.
Collections Management system vendors with AMICO Data Specification,
and request AMICO output format.
your collections management system vendor with a written request to
implement an AMICO output report.
all the data editing, occurrence listing, data parsing and validating
tools developed to help AMICO's contribute and clean up their data,
along with documentation.
up on MCN vendor discussions with written request to collections management
system vendors to implement an AMICO output report
on Process Evaluation Form draft. Share any documentation of AMICO
work-flow at your institution.
list of all contemporary artists represented in AMICO Testbed Library,
in format that makes it easy for each member to review their subset
and indicate the extent of the grant of rights (any museum use, only
AMICO, limited duration, any work/limited works/one work only, etc.)
new Process Evaluation Form.
occurrence lists for each field for their 1998 data and correct inconsistencies
representative to the Editorial Committee
parsed data to report any parsing routine errors that are systematic
in their data.
list of artists/rights for 1998. Add list of artists for who the museum
expects to request rights for its 1999 contribution.
AMICO with a list of works to be included in their 1999 contribution,
categorized by Century and country/continent of origin.
Process Evaluations. Return it to AMICO for analysis
at least two new very rich records about works of art. These records
should exemplify what each institution believes might ultimately be
present in a "full" documentation package from that member. It could
be "full" by virtue of having a large amount of interpretive text,
containing additional educational materials, or including a range
of additional multi-media files. The purpose of this is to create
a small database of materials of these sorts with which potential
distributors can test a wide range of functionalities. These works
will be included in the 1999 library (and can be counted towards that
December 31, 1998
1999/2000 contribution to Library
and Uses Committee Focus Group meeting with University Testbed Participants
during CAA/VRA in Los Angeles
February 28, 1999
1999/2000 contribution to Library
Information Policy Workshop at Museums and the Web in New Orleans;
free to AMICO Members.
prior to AAM in Cleveland (Users/Editorial issues as focus?)
AMICO/ University Testbed
May/ Early June
Wrap-up meeting and Annual AMICO Meeting. Dates and location to be
The group expressed its thanks to the Los Angeles County Museum of Art,
particularly Diana Folsom and Rebecca Lachter, for hosting their meeting,
and arranging the tour of the Picasso Exhibition. Ken Hamma was also thanked
for arranging parking at the Getty Center for the afternoon of Tuesday,
when members went on a self-guided tour.
Asia Society Galleries
Cleveland Museum of
J. Paul Getty Museum
Los Angeles County
Museum of Art
Museum of Contemporary
Art, San Diego
National Gallery of
National Museum of
San Jose Museum of
San Francisco Museum
of Modern Art
Walker Art Center
Whitney Museum of
Art Institute of Chicago
Albright Knox Art
Center for Contemporary
Art Gallery of Ontario
Boston Museum of Fine
The Frick Collection
Montreal Museum of
Museums of Fine Art,
contemporain de Montréal
of Fine Art
Last modified on