Dear content partners,
 
considering that:
 

• We are all committed to ingest a considerable amount of content on our ECLAP portal,
• We have to compare metadata fields already existing in our archives and collections in order to assess a unique ECLAP metadata model,
• We have to agree on a common taxonomy, specific for the Performing Arts collections and effective in describing items pertaining to very different performing arts domains,
• We have to agree on the most useful way of clustering and aggregating our content in order to create the first European Performing Arts Digital Collection,
• We have to fulfil specific requirements in order to attract more and more users,
• Some of us already proposed relevant issues and topics in the ECLAP mailing list,

 
We think it is time to begin an internal ECLAP forum to deal with content issues, ranging from assessing a specific taxonomy and a common vocabulary (at least in English) to setting some criteria for the aggregation and clustering of our content.
 
WHEN
 
This forum will be open from now on, simultaneously to the process of massive content uploading that is on its way.
 
WHO
 
This forum will be open to discuss and exchange possible solutions with all ECLAP content partners as well as with all interested registered users who are (or will be soon) in contact with our work.
The forum will be managed by Uniroma and open to all contributors.
 
WHAT TO DO
 
This forum is an open space you can use to exchange your point of view on many content topics.
The first one is the creation of the ECLAP Content Management Board that will soon meet for the first time. We accept candidates among content partners who wish to be part of this board.
 
Hopefully, the Content Management Board will be held during our next internal meeting planned to be held in October. This means that soon we’ll need to define the agenda of the Board’s meeting so please start posting your comments, your needs and your candidature.
 
WE ARE STARTING OUR FORUM NOW WITH THE LAUNCH OF A SHORT SURVEY ABOUT TWO IMPORTANT TOPICS OF THE CONTENT BOARD AGENDA, CONCERNING THE CREATION OF A SPECIFIC PERFORMING ARTS TAXONOMY AND THE REFINING OF THE ECLAP METADATA MODEL:
 
As a starting point, we’d like to launch a discussion on what Lotte was writing in a recent mail and ask you to answer giving you opinion about two of her statements:
 
Point 1- Sub-section 6.3.2 of DE2.1.1 deals with having a broad selection of content which users can search for. Although the taxonomy needs to be improved and a clear workflow is needed for tagging digital objects with the terms from this taxonomy is needed, the taxonomy defined in DE2.1.1 has been implemented and can be used when searching and browsing. 
 
Do you agree with this statement?
 
How would you implement this topic that deals with improving and refining the existing ECLAP taxonomy?
 
Point 2- Sub-section 6.3.2 of DE2.1.1 deals with metadata requirements. Although the metadata model should be double-checked, the UNIROMA suggestions have been incorporated in the ECLAP metadata model. 
 
Do you agree with this statement?
 
How would you implement the ECLAP metadata model?
 
Thank you for your participation!
 
The CTA-Uniroma ECLAP team