Igeneric Thoughts Archives: November 2004

« October 2004 |Main | December 2004 »

Hunterian Museum launches What Clicks study on museums and eLearning


November 30, 2004

The Hunterian Museum & Art Gallery, University of Glasgow has launched their new publication, “What Clicks?” According to the Press Release the publication outlines the exciting potential of ICT to increase public access to museum collections and develop e-learning facilities. Research reported in the document show that 73% of schoolteachers used websites to help plan lessons, yet 74.5% of the Scottish Museums surveyed either didn’t know or weren’t sure what use was made of their websites by remote audiences. The report recommends therefore, that marketing strategies for museums need to be developed to ensure that resources are reaching those who require them, and in a format which is most relevant to them.

The Hunterian has been working in partnership with the Smithsonian Institution and Harvard University in the United States, and with a variety of bodies from across the museum and education sector in Scotland to produce this publication. The project investigated ways in which ICT can achieve access for all to the nation’s museum collections, and can promote new learning styles that actively engage those physically remote from museums collections. Key to its findings were...

Museums must be more organised in terms of what they want their websites to do for them. Specifically, museums must

• establish their target audiences.

• identify the user needs of these audiences.

• consider whether these user needs are being met.

•embrace fully the philosophy of “access for all”.

Some museums in Scotland, particularly University Museums, are leading the way in the development and use of electronic resources. Undoubtedly finances play a huge part in this, therefore it is important for those who are more experienced in developing resources to share their knowledge throughout the museum community and provide leadership, partnership and examples of good practice.

Electronic copies of the What Clicks? Report can be downloaded from www.hunterian.gla.ac.uk/what_clicks/

Posted by David Dawson at 11:11 | Make or Read Comments(0) | TrackBack (0)

People's Network comes of age


November 25, 2004

Yesterday, I attended an event to mark the handover of the People's Network from the Big Lottery Fund to all of the bodies now tasked with maintaining and building upon the Lottery's initial investment.

The People's Network is a remarkable achievement; £100,000,000 spent on over 30,000 public access terminals in 4,000 public libraries across the UK, connected to the Internet at Broadband speeds. Achieved on time and within budget. £20,000,000 spent on training public library staff the length and breadth of the country, to ensure that all those shiny new computers can be used by new users (according to recent MORI research, 16% of adults in the UK have accessed the internet using one of these terminals).

The vision was... well, visionary. Especially as this endeavour was planned back in the late 1990's, with the roll-out commencing in 2000. Thinking back to what libraries - and the information landscape - were like then, it was a truly brave move, and one that is now paying dividends.

Presentations on the day demonstrated achievements from across the UK, and pointed to some of the work still being done through initiatives such as MLA's evolving People's Network Service. Speakers also referred to issues yet to be resolved, including the need to find local funds to refresh equipment as it grows older, and efforts to further address exclusion.

There was also a presentation from the Programme's evaluators at the Tavistock Institute, whose evaluation appeared online today. Have a read, and see what you think about “burning all the desks”...!

Posted by Oliver Smith-Toynes at 22:04 | Make or Read Comments(0) | TrackBack (1)

Review of the English National Monuments Record


November 23, 2004

Each of the home countries of the United Kingdom has a register of nationally significant elements of the historic environment; a National Monuments Record.

In England, this Record is maintained by English Heritage, and they have recently completed a review of their current offering, and of the ways in which it might most usefully change in future.

The review site includes the report and a body of background material, and makes it clear that English Heritage recognise the importance of making their content available online through a multitude of channels, and for a wide variety of purposes.

It will be interesting to see how this progresses, with the vast body of authoritative English Heritage content hopefully integrating with and supporting a wide range of existing and future online activities related to the Historic Environment.

Posted by Oliver Smith-Toynes at 17:06 | Make or Read Comments(0) | TrackBack (0)

Firefox browser comes with ability to search for content licensed under Creative Commons


November 23, 2004

The Creative Commons weblog draws my attention to an ability of the cross-platform Firefox web browser that I hadn't noticed.

Like Safari and other modern browsers, Firefox includes a 'Search' box in the menu bar. By default (like Safari) typing a term here sends it as a search to Google. However, clicking in Firefox's search box drops down a list of targets, including Creative Commons. Choosing this target and entering a search submits it to Creative Commons' list of content licensed for reuse under one of their licences.

A useful feature, and I wonder how heavily it's being used?

Posted by Oliver Smith-Toynes at 07:51 | Make or Read Comments(2) | TrackBack (0)

The Register sees a role for public libraries


November 21, 2004

There's an interesting piece in The Register, which sounds very like MLA's People's Network Service, and aspects of the Common Information Environment.

Someone should tell them!

Posted by Oliver Smith-Toynes at 21:07 | Make or Read Comments(0) | TrackBack (0)

Reports explore notions of online credibility


November 18, 2004

Although positively ancient in Internet terms, two reports from Consumer WebWatch in the USA are worth a read in relation to our ongoing interest in building Trust in the online offerings of Igeneric partner organisations.

How Do People Evaluate a Web Site's Credibility (2002), prepared by Stanford's Persuasive Technology Lab for Consumer WebWatch, reports on the impressions of more than 2,600 users when presented with a number of web sites. The Abstract describes the Key Findings:

“We found that when people assessed a real Web site's credibility they did not use rigorous criteria, a contrast to the findings of Consumer WebWatch's earlier national survey, A Matter of Trust: What Users Want From Web Sites, released April 16, 2002. In this poll of 1,500 U.S. adult Internet users, people claimed that certain elements were vital to a Web site's credibility (e.g., having a privacy policy). But this most recent Web-based credibility study showed that people rarely used these rigorous criteria when evaluating credibility (e.g., they almost never referred to a site's privacy policy.) We found a mismatch, as in other areas of life, between what people say is important and what they actually do.

The data showed that the average consumer paid far more attention to the superficial aspects of a site, such as visual cues, than to its content. For example, nearly half of all consumers (or 46.1%) in the study assessed the credibility of sites based in part on the appeal of the overall visual design of a site, including layout, typography, font size and color schemes.

This reliance on a site's overall visual appeal to gauge its credibility occurred more often with some categories of sites then others. Consumer credibility-related comments about visual design issues occurred with more frequency with finance (54.6%), search engines (52.6%), travel (50.5%), and e-commerce sites (46.2%), and with less frequency when assessing health (41.8%), news (39.6%), and nonprofit (39.4%) sites. In comparison, the parallel Sliced Bread Design study revealed that health and finance experts were far less concerned about the surface aspects of these industry-specific types of sites and more concerned about the breadth, depth, and quality of a site's information.”

The second report is Experts vs Online Consumers: A comparative credibility study of Health and Finance Web Sites (2002). This report looks at the premise that consumers are making naive assessments of online offerings, and compares their opinions to those of a panel of subject experts. Quoting from the Key Findings in the Abstract:

“The online consumers in the Stanford PTL study and our expert panel of evaluators diverged greatly in their credibility assessment criteria. Overall, our experts were far less concerned about visual appeal as a marker of credibility than the Stanford PTL consumers, and they were more concerned about the quality of a site's information. Among other conclusions, this study found that health experts assigned more credibility to health sites that provided information from reputable sources and cited the names and credentials of authors for each article published. Finance experts assigned more credibility to finance sites that provided investors with a great deal of unbiased educational information and research, rather than nudging consumers toward their own products or services.

The Stanford PTL study found that consumers tended to rely heavily on overall visual design when assessing Web sites, including layout, typography and color schemes. About half (54.6%) of the comments by the consumers regarding finance sites referred to design look, which relates to the visual appeal of a site's design, compared to only 16.4 percent of finance expert comments on this topic. Likewise, 41.8 percent of consumer comments regarding health sites made note of a site's design look, compared to 7.6 percent of surveyed health experts' comments which mentioned this topic.

Our health experts most often relied on the name reputation of a site, its operator, or that of its affiliates, when assessing the credibility of health Web sites (43.9% of health expert comments related to this credibility criterion). The next most common issues mentioned when evaluating health site credibility were information source, which relates to the citation of a site's information sources (25.8%), and company motive, which relates to a user's perception of the motive of the organization behind the site, whether good or bad (22.7%).

Our finance experts most often relied on a site's scope or information focus when assessing the credibility of finance Web sites, which includes consideration of the quantity of information provided (40.3% of finance expert comments related to this credibility criterion). The next most common issues mentioned when evaluating finance site credibility were company motive (35.8%), and information bias (29.9%), which relates to a user's perception of bias in the site's content.

This study also reveals which specific elements lend credibility to a site's perception, according to each health and finance expert group. In addition, the report provides recommendations to Web publishers, particularly those in the health and finance fields, which aim to increase the credibility of sites among each type of Internet audience.”

Both reports were brought to my attention through a posting by Joshua Porter on his blog. It, in turn, was flagged up by a posting earlier this week to Asterisk.

Posted by Oliver Smith-Toynes at 15:52 | Make or Read Comments(0) | TrackBack (0)

National Library for Health launched in the UK


November 18, 2004

The first phase of the new NHS National Library for Health officially went live today.

This development includes the long-running and successful National Electronic Library for Health, one of the Igeneric's key partners.

News from an NeLH RSS feed.

Posted by Oliver Smith-Toynes at 15:11 | Make or Read Comments(0) | TrackBack (0)

Search for peer reviewed material with Google Scholar


November 18, 2004

Google today launched a new beta service, Google Scholar.

Quoting their own information,

“Google Scholar enables you to search specifically for scholarly literature, including peer-reviewed papers, theses, books, preprints, abstracts and technical reports from all broad areas of research. Use Google Scholar to find articles from a wide variety of academic publishers, professional societies, preprint repositories and universities, as well as scholarly articles available across the web.

Just as with Google Web Search, Google Scholar orders your search results by how relevant they are to your query, so the most useful references should appear at the top of the page. This relevance ranking takes into account the full text of each article as well as the article's author, the publication in which the article appeared and how often it has been cited in scholarly literature. Google Scholar also automatically analyzes and extracts citations and presents them as separate results, even if the documents they refer to are not online. This means your search results may include citations of older works and seminal articles that appear only in books or other offline publications.”

There's some more information from ResourceShelf, and thanks also to Pete Johnston and Andy Powell at UKOLN for flagging this to me.

Posted by Oliver Smith-Toynes at 12:48 | Make or Read Comments(0) | TrackBack (0)

Find books in nearby libraries, thanks to OCLC and Yahoo!


November 16, 2004

Andy Boyer, OCLC's Open WorldCat Product Manager, writes in the Yahoo! Search blog, describing an addition to Yahoo!'s toolbar that lets the user search for library resources in nearby libraries... right in the Yahoo! toolbar on their browser.

At the moment, the toolbar allows searches on the 2,000,000 most popular records in WorldCat, but Andy says that they're hard at work providing access to more of the 57,000,000 catalogue records (for 944,506,147 individual holdings) they maintain.

Posted by Oliver Smith-Toynes at 12:05 | Make or Read Comments(0) | TrackBack (0)

“Digital Future” talks from the Library of Congress... live or archived from C-SPAN


November 13, 2004

Kevin Roebuck at Sun draws my attention to a series of talks on the “Digital Future”, to be given at the Library of Congress and broadcast live on C-SPAN.

For those of us on this side of the Atlantic, who don't fancy watching the live stream at 23:30 GMT, the content will apparently be archived at C-SPAN too...

The first talk is by blogger David Weinberger, and will be given at 18:30 ET (23:30 GMT) on Monday 15 November. Other presentations follow between then and March 2018, and include Brewester Kahle from the Internet Archive and Lawrence Lessig from the Creative Commons.

Posted by Oliver Smith-Toynes at 10:51 | Make or Read Comments(0) | TrackBack (2)

Being online more popular than reading magazines and newspapers... ?


November 12, 2004

AlwaysOn yesterday reported that

“Online use constitutes 20% of total media consumption in the UK, according to European Interactive Advertising Association. 7% of time is spent on reading magazines and 10% on reading newspapers, with users spending 27% of their time listening to the radio. TV still represents the largest share of media time at 36%, but nearly a third of those online claimed to watch less TV as result of using the Internet. 40% of internet users in the UK are online seven days a week, with 10% claiming to spend at least 25 hours surfing the web.”

Are these figures really comparing like with like? “Online use” surely encompasses a much broader set of activities than the pastimes to which it is being compared, with an increasing number of people drawing upon online resources across their working and personal lives. I, for example, certainly read newspapers and magazines, listen to the radio or watch television, but those (except listening to the radio, maybe?) are conscious activities to which I devote myself to the exclusion of other things. The Network, though, is available to me all the time, and will be turned to repeatedly throughout my day to facilitate my work and aspects of my personal life. So how do we measure that, or compare it with the act of sitting down to read a newspaper ?

Posted by Oliver Smith-Toynes at 13:57 | Make or Read Comments(0) | TrackBack (0)

Web User finds 24 Hour Museum to be the UK's best museum web site


November 12, 2004

Web User has declared the 24 Hour Museum to be the best museum web site, beating off other high-profile sites like Tate and Ingenious.

News from the 24 Hour Museum RSS feed.

Posted by Oliver Smith-Toynes at 13:42 | Make or Read Comments(0) | TrackBack (2)

Census the most popular book ?


November 12, 2004

OCLC has released a list of the 1,000 most popular books, as defined by the holdings of OCLC libraries.

Number 1 is the Census, 403,252 copies of which are held in various libraries.

At Number 2 is the Bible, with 271,534 copies.

Number 3 was a surprise to me, at least; 66,543 copies of Mother Goose!

Item reported on the OCLC Research news feed.

Posted by Oliver Smith-Toynes at 13:36 | Make or Read Comments(0) | TrackBack (2)

OCLC's take on shared or common services


November 11, 2004

Lorcan Dempsey blogs the pre-print release of a new paper, Metadata switch: thinking about some metadata management and knowledge organization in the changing research and learning landscape (PDF download).

The paper discusses work under the various strands of OCLC's Metadata Switch activity, which seeks to build and test a series of modular Web Services designed to allow third parties to add value to metadata they are creating, using, or repurposing.

Examples of this enrichment include, for example, submitting a Dublin Core record to a Web Service, and having it return a MARC formatted version of the same record for inclusion in a library catalogue, or submitting the name of an individual and having a set of possible people returned from a name authority file.

As a holder of vast quantities of data (in WorldCat) and supporting tools (the Dewey classification or Name Authority files, for example), OCLC is well placed to build and offer tools such as these in a way that individual libraries could not.

In many ways, these services are similar to some of the ideas being discussed within JISC for Shared Services; machine and human-accessible pieces of core infrastructure accessible to applications built by third parties, and intended to add value to what they do by offering common solutions (authentication and authorisation, for example) in a small number of locations.

Posted by Oliver Smith-Toynes at 09:42 | Make or Read Comments(0) | TrackBack (0)

Getting people to want to read...


November 9, 2004

I gave a Keynote at this year's Talis conference in Birmingham today. I spoke about the disconnect between public bodies as holders of valuable content and those members of the public who seek to discover and engage with that content.

One positive example of offering buried content to users where they happen to be was that of Jon Udell's LibraryLookup tool. This is a simple bookmarklet that allows a user to view a book on Amazon and, with a single click, check to see if their local library has a copy. In principle, brilliant. Unfortunately (and this isn't Jon's fault), the majority of the UK library sites that I tried returned an incomprehensible error code rather than either the book in question or an understandable description of a fault. Even in some of the cases where the search was successful, the libraries concerned clearly hadn't anticipated such a link deep into their site (bypassing the brand-heavy home page), as I ended up on a page devoid of branding (which library am I at, again?) or navigation. Still, at least they showed that they had a copy of the book. Why, though, do organisations continue in the mistaken belief that I want to visit their endless websites, or that I want to navigate them sequentially from the top (the homepage), through diverse intermediate steps before arriving at a page that may or may not provide the resource I was seeking?

I also briefly mentioned the excellent whichbook.net, which is well worth a look.

Another Keynote speaker did it - and sites like it - far more justice.

Rachel Van Riel, Director of Opening the Book, spoke about the work of her organisation in finding innovative ways in which to encourage reading. She, too, highlighted simple limitations in many public library catalogues and pointed to their origins as collection management tools for trained staff physically located in the library building. For users coming across the library online, poor branding and a lack of basic information such as how to join or find the library create poor first impressions.

Through sites such as whichbook.net, Opening the Book is now working aggressively to make books and reading more accessible and relevant to those beyond what public libraries may long have considered their core demographic. These sites recognise that many people do not necessarily have a specific title or author in mind when looking for something to read, meaning that traditional library interfaces may not help. Further, web users often wish to be entertained and engaged, and the web itself may offer a means to make library offerings relevant to new markets.

whichbook.net, for example, was funded by the New Opportunities Fund (now the Big Lottery), and allows the user to select a variety of criteria (happy/sad, easy/demanding, etc) upon which a number of books will be selected for them. These books may include reviews by other readers, and a link is provided to click through and see if the book is available in your local (UK) library.

Variations on this theme, all aimed at different audiences, include www.givemeabreak.org (which adopts a short-break metaphor to bilingually engage 16-30 year olds in Wales), www.whatareyouuptotonight.com (aimed at 16-25 year olds in the East Midlands of England, and featuring a 'Blind Date' option that delivers an unknown book matching certain criteria to the reader's nearest library for collection), and www.4ureaders.net (offering different interfaces for boys and girls in south-central Scotland).

Each offers an interesting and engaging interface onto dry library data, each works to encourage people to read - and to try new authors and subject matter - and each links through to real books held in local public libraries. Brilliant.

Posted by Oliver Smith-Toynes at 21:54 | Make or Read Comments(0) | TrackBack (1)

Digital Curation Centre launches


November 7, 2004

The Digital Curation Centre launched formally on 5 November.

The Centre is funded by the JISC and the e-Science Core Programme in the UK, and harnesses expertise from a range of partners.

Posted by Oliver Smith-Toynes at 18:42 | Make or Read Comments(0) | TrackBack (0)

Thomson assesses impact of Open Access journals


November 4, 2004

Thomson Scientific, the company behind such products as the Web of Science Abstracting & Indexing database, has released a new white paper, Open Access Journals in the ISI Citation Databases: Analysis of Impact Factors and Citation Patterns [free registration required, and the URL doesn't appear terribly persistent].

According to EContentMag.com,

“The findings indicate that journals published under the Open Access (OSA) model continue to gain impact in the world of scholarly research. Despite ranking lower as a group than those published under traditional models, the growth in the number of OA journals is impressive, and some OA journals rank near the top of their respective fields.”

News item from an EContentMag.com RSS feed.

Posted by Oliver Smith-Toynes at 10:34 | Make or Read Comments(0) | TrackBack (1)

Declaring rights over metadata via the Open Archives Protocol


November 4, 2004

Stephen Downes over at OLDaily draws my attention to a new draft document from the Open Archives Initiative.

The draft specification illustrates how one might embed links within OAI Protocol for Metadata Harvesting (OAI-PMH) metadata in order to refer to an external encoding of rights declarations such as those offered by Creative Commons.

As the document says,

“The Open Archives Initiative Protocol for Metadata Harvesting (OAI-PMH) provides a mechanism for data providers to expose metadata for harvesting over the Web. This metadata is disseminated in OAI-PMH records. Metadata harvested from one or more data providers using the OAI-PMH can be used by service providers for the creation of services (e.g. search, browse) based on the harvested data.

Data providers might want to associate rights expressions with the metadata to indicate how it may be used, shared, and modified after it has been harvested. This specification defines how rights information pertaining to the metadata should be included in responses to OAI-PMH requests”

The specification is neutral as to the actual system of rights expressions used, but demonstrates the concepts using Creative Commons.

Item from the OLDaily RSS feed.

Posted by Oliver Smith-Toynes at 08:21 | Make or Read Comments(0) | TrackBack (2)

Protecting Children Online - whilst not restricting freedoms for all


November 2, 2004

Various media channels (including The Register, the BBC News site, and the Today programme on Radio 4) have today been covering a story about the need to increase child safety online through a range of measures from provision of a source of expertise upon which law enforcement agencies can draw to increased availability of tools and knowledge to assist parents in protecting their own children.

I attended an ippr/NCH event at the House of Lords this afternoon, at which the Children's Charities' Coalition for Internet Safety released their manifesto for Child Safety Online (PDF file).

The meeting was Chaired by Brian White MP, Chair of EURIM, and speakers included Oliver Goggins MP (Parliamentary Under Secretary of State at the Home Office and Chair of the Home Office Internet Task Force for Child Safety on the Internet), John Carr (NCH, representing the Coalition), Mike Galvin (Director Internet Operations at BT), and freelance journalist Bill Thompson.

Speaking first, John Carr pointed to some of the successes of the Coalition and of the Internet Task Force. 94% of children online, for example, are now aware that people with whom they are conversing in Internet Chat rooms may not be who they claim to be. As well as being a success for the work of John and his colleagues, this statistic should surely remind us that young people aren't daft; given access to education, they absorb it, and apply it in situations in which they later find themselves.

He also pointed to a proposal amongst mobile telephone companies in the UK, whereby they are encouraging the rating of sites carrying material unsuitable for minors, and will block access to those sites from the phones of young people. In an additional step, they are apparently intending to assume that any phone belongs to a minor unless its owner declares themselves to be an adult, and opts in to accessing adult content.

Oliver Goggins MP spoke of the distinctions between self regulation of Internet Service Providers by themselves and their peers as opposed to regulation by Government in the form of legislation. There is a similar distinction to be made (for the ISPs and for us as end-users) between taking responsibility for our own actions (surely a good thing?) and simply complying with what someone else tells us to do. If we only ever comply, how do we learn to think for ourselves, and avoid future mistakes?

Mike Galvin from BT started by making a point that I'm sure the other speakers probably agreed with, but didn't say. It's a point that often gets overlooked in debates such as this, where the perceived need to focus attention upon the bad, the frightening, and the worst case leads us to forget the norm; there is useful, high quality content online, and millions of children and young people access online services every day in order to learn, to be entertained, to communicate, and to enrich their lives, all without coming to any harm.

Finally, Bill Thompson spoke to stir the debate a little. He suggested that public and political debate on this topic was being dominated by the voice of the Children's Charities, driven by their mission to protect children. He challenged some of what they were attempting, but mainly appealed for other voices to be heard in the debate. As well as hearing those who sought to protect children, the debate also needed to be informed by those who sought to protect the Internet and all that it offers, for example.

He argued, compellingly I thought, that the most important solution to the problem was in education; in teaching children to think, to take responsibility, and to grow into Internet-using adults, rather than wrapping them around with firewalls, walled gardens and the like that shielded them totally from the reality of the online environment.

He cited the example of his children, arguing that he would no more prevent his daughter from researching material for her homework online (in case she came across inappropriate or dangerous content or behaviour) than he would stop his son playing rugby at school (in case he broke an arm). He has a point.

The session concluded with a wide-ranging debate in which a number of contrasting views were put forward. As a good proponent of Joined Up Government, I highlighted the Ofcom Media Literacy work that I blogged earlier today. This work, it seems to me, has real potential to deliver useful and well-adjusted members of the Knowledge Society, but it can't just be Ofcom. It'll need the Home Office, DfES, and other agencies to be involved as well. We're increasingly seeing ICT awareness described as the third Literacy (after reading/writing and Numeracy). If it's true - and it must be - let's start devoting serious effort to it, and consider all of the issues, rather than simply whipping up hysteria around the bogey-men that lurk online (and off!).

Update - Will Davies today posted the text of Bill Thompson's presentation, and an ippr summary of the event (both PDF downloads).

Posted by Oliver Smith-Toynes at 22:20 | Make or Read Comments(0) | TrackBack (1)

Ofcom publishes response to Media Literacy consulatation


November 2, 2004

The United Kingdom's Office of Communications (Ofcom), the body responsible for regulating communications industries here, has today published their response to a consultation they conducted over the summer. The consultation looked at the role Ofcom should take in promoting media literacy, defined by them as:

“the ability to access, understand and create communications in a variety of contexts”

The Agency's press release summarises the outcomes, stating that Ofcom will support

Research: A wide ranging research programme will be undertaken to assess the extent of media literacy in the UK. The research will also seek to identify the issues and priorities for developing greater media literacy skills amongst both adults and children, as well as identifying the needs of different sections of society.
The development of a common labelling system to support greater consistency in presenting information related to possible harm and offence and to protect young and vulnerable people from inappropriate material. However, Ofcom also recognises the concerns raised by some stakeholderes about the best way to inform viewers about the nature of content.”

More detail is available in their full response (also available as a single PDF), which identifies a third key strand of work related to raising awareness and building partnerships.

A lot of this is relevant to the Common Information Environment, and Ofcom's identification of the need for a common labelling system obviously aligns with our own work around Trust marks, although our emphasis would be the Web, whereas theirs is audio-visual material. Another difference in emphasis is that the Igeneric work prioritises allowing the searcher to make an informed decision about the reliability of a site and its content, whereas the Ofcom work is - understandably, given current political engagement in this area - more concerned with protection of children and other at-risk elements of society.

There's perhaps more scope for commonality than not, though, and we are talking to Ofcom about ways in which some of this work might move forward in tandem.

Posted by Oliver Smith-Toynes at 12:57 | Make or Read Comments(0) | TrackBack (1)


eScience Logo The Joint Information Systems Committee Logo British Library Logo Museums, Libraries & Archives Council Logo National electronic Library for Health Logo
The Common Information Environment Sponsors are...
Page Maintained by Oliver Smith-Toynes
Last Updated: April 05, 2018
Accessibility Statement
Creative Commons Licence