DOME Project Planning Template - Alternate Format
Title of Project |
DavidTaylorModelBasin Technical Reports |
Date of template (last revision) |
February 21, 2008 |
Submitted by: name(s) & contact information |
|
Sponsoring Library/Libraries |
Barker / Engineering and Science Libraries |
Abstract (1-2 sentences) |
This project proposes to create digital editions of all of the technical reports held by Barker Library in three series from the DavidTaylorModelBasin. |
I. PROJECT CONCEPT |
|
A. DESCRIPTION |
|
Goals of project. including desired end-product for users and MIT Libraries. |
- To share a uniquely complete collection of technical literature concerning hydrodynamics and engineering, based on research conducted with the DavidTaylorModelBasin. |
Description of content. Subject and significance of content, relationship to scope and other collections of MIT Libraries, whether the content was produced at MIT, and if the content is unique. |
- Broad subject: ocean engineering (e.g. underwater robotics, hydrology) |
Spatial extent of content. Number of pieces / units and growth rates as well as other indicators of scale (e.g. file sizes). |
Approximately 1000 pieces. No pieces are being added. |
Temporal extent of content. Span of years covered. |
Approximately 1934-1980's (date range is being established by inventory of collection - completed Dec. 2007). |
Rights and/or source of content, if known. Planned restrictions if any on distribution or access to digital versions in DOME; if permissions will be needed, have been granted, etc. |
All are believed to be in public domain. No restricted government reports. |
B. JUSTIFICATION |
|
Anticipated audience(s) for content. Include curricular or research needs that will be served; or benefits to audiences beyond MIT. |
These resources would be of use to the MIT mechanical and ocean engineering student community as well as to students of aeronautics and astronautics. |
Anticipated benefits of digitization. (e.g. search, access, manipulation) |
The primary benefit would be improved access to these reports both at MIT and beyond. Specific priorities are OCR and metadata for figures (i.e., diagrams, etc.) |
Is original content at risk or obsolete? |
No, though as relatively rare printed material it is subject to loss and deterioration. |
C. FUNDING |
|
Funding: is funding available now, what amounts; what are additional or likely sources of funding? |
Proposed funding for this pilot effort would be provided by the MIT Libraries digitization fund. |
Funding: . If no funding has been secured, where might funding be found? |
If additional funds were needed, it might be possible to work with the Department of Mechanical Engineering and/or the Center for Research Libraries and GWLA. |
D. SPECIFICATIONS |
|
If analog, who manufactured this material? |
Printed by the US Government. |
If already digitized, technical specifications for digital version; quality/condition as of today; should analog and digital be linked in some way. |
Not applicable. |
If born digital, technical specifications; quality condition as of today? What standards/best practices were used? |
Not applicable. |
E. METADATA |
|
Does the project come with descriptive metadata? |
No. However, Excel inventory could be used to produce descriptive metadata. |
Does the project come with technical metadata? |
No. |
Does the project come with administrative metadata? |
No. |
Does the project come with preservation metadata? |
No. |
Can the metadata be migrated? |
TBD |
Does the metadata conform to best practices? |
Not applicable (not intent of inventory). |
F. ACCESS / USABILITY |
|
Will the content interoperate with our systems? |
|
Proposed features and delivery requirements |
|
Format |
|
Data |
|
Access |
|
Usability |
Full text searching for text; |
Other comments |
|
II. PROJECT REQUIREMENTS |
|
A. Steps needed to produce product |
Inventory was produced by ESL (Excel) |
B. Feasibility of each step in terms of: |
Some questions to address: |
C. Can project be carried out in stages? |
|
D. Does project build on previous or concurrent work |
AI Lab Working Papers |
E. What new capabilities are required |
|
F. Could these capabilities benefit other projects |
|
G. Sustainability requirements for: curation, technical support, addition of new content, development of new tools |
Potential to add more DTMB reports that we don't currently have in our print collection. Collaboration with other libraries may be possible. |
H. Other requirements |
|