/mw/














A&MI home
Archives & Museum Informatics
158 Lee Avenue
Toronto Ontario
M4E 2P3 Canada

ph: +1 416-691-2516
fx: +1 416-352-6025

info @ archimuse.com
www.archimuse.com

Search Search

Join our Mailing List.
Privacy.

 

published: March 2004
analytic scripts updated:
October 28, 2010

Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0  License
Museums and the Web 2003 Papers

 

Addressing Multiple Audiences with Multiple Interfaces to The AMICO Library™

S. Sayre, and K. Wetterlund, The Art Museum Image Consortium, USA

Abstract

The Art Museum Image Consortium "AMICO" (www.amico.org) is a group of over three-dozen Member Museums, which have committed to digitize their collections and contribute them to an integrated library on an on-going basis. The AMICO Library™ has been available to educational institutions-- including colleges and universities, elementary and secondary schools, public libraries and museums-- for almost five years and grows significantly each year. The 2003 edition of The AMICO Library™ will contain over 120,000 works of art. After three years of distribution through a single source (RLG, Inc.), AMICO began contracting with other Distributors, each specializing in a different audience, to reach and meet the diverse needs of multiple user communities. Today, each of these six Distributors delivers The AMICO Library™ through their own unique interfaces, often along with other digital resources. This range of Distributors now allows subscribing institutions to choose among the different services and interfaces that are compatible with their institutional requirements and best meet the needs of their end users.

The variety of Distributors of The AMICO Library™ also allows AMICO Member Museums to access and view their digital documentation through a variety of tools and interfaces developed outside of their own direct influence or control. Each Distributor and interface has a significant effect on how the work is used, explored and perceived. This paper explores the multiple interface approach to distributing content as well as the differences in features and functions of multiple distributors. Issues addressed include audience specific functionality, inter-application consistency and the need for additional research.

Keywords: Multiple Interfaces, Multiple Audiences, Features and Functions, Multiple Distributors, Art Museum Images


Introduction

Cultural heritage resources such as museum collections serve a number of educational functions for a wide range of diverse audiences. Museums have historically addressed the needs of these varied audiences through the development of discrete print and/or electronic products, educational programs designed to serve a particular audience and purpose, and reflecting only part of the data known to the institution. The emergence of data driven, online cultural resources now offers museums the opportunity to develop new models to disseminate a unified, continuously augmented resource through a number of different interfaces designed to provide views and tools suited to a range of audiences.

The Art Museum Image Consortium (AMICO) is a non-profit corporation formed by North American art museums in 1997 to provide educational access to and delivery of cultural heritage information by creating, maintaining and licensing a collective digital library of images and documentation of works in their collections. The 39 current Member Museums annually contribute digital images, text, multimedia and related metadata to one centralized library. All contributions are governed by the AMICO Data Specifications and descriptive standards based on the Categories for Descriptions of Works of Art (ed., Baca and Harpring, 2000). Member contributions are collected, validated, and enhanced through indexing by AMICO staff before the resulting Library is released to AMICO Distributors and through them, to the end users.

Beyond the technical aspects of building the digital library, one of AMICO's primary functions is facilitating, maintaining and enforcing the licensing of the intellectual property of The AMICO Library™ (Bearman & Trant 1997). AMICO licenses the contributed assets from each Member Museum and in turn licenses The AMICO Library™ to each of the Distributors. Separate, standardized license agreements are also contracted between AMICO and each subscriber to The AMICO Library™. These subscriber licenses specify the terms of The AMICO Library's™ use according to the agreements AMICO has with its Member Museums. The protection provided by these licenses and the controlled distribution of The AMICO Library™ has allowed AMICO to negotiate blanket rights agreements for works of artists under copyright and managed by the Artist Right Society "ARS" and the Visual Arts Galleries Association "VAGA." These agreements in turn allow AMICO subscribers access to digital images of works of art that are not typically available to the public.


The AMICO Library™

The AMICO Library™ currently consists of museum created digital documentation of over 100,000 works of art from around the world. Works range from prehistoric to contemporary times, and cover the complete range of expressive forms. Cultures and time periods represented range from contemporary art, Native American, and Inuit art to ancient Greek, Roman, and Egyptian works, as well as Japanese and Chinese works.

The types of works in The AMICO Library™ include:

  • over 13,000 paintings
  • over 5,900 sculptures
  • over 13,700 drawings and watercolors
  • over 23,800 prints
  • over 29,000 photographs
  • over 1,800 textiles
  • over 1,600 costumes and jewelry
  • over 9,800 works of decorative art
  • over 1,200 books and manuscripts

    A complete breakdown of the current library can be found at (http://www.amico.org/AMICOlibrary/contents.html).

Digital documentation for each represented work varies based on the type of object, existing documentation and what each Member Museum has selected to contribute. AMICO's Data Specification requires that all contributed works contain at least one representative image and a set of 30 core fields of basic information including object title, measurements, materials and techniques, creator culture/nationality, creation date, owner name, accession number, and owner credit line. Other core fields include metadata such as Library contribution date to assist in maintaining The AMICO Library™ over time. Most records contain an extended set of information above and beyond the core fields including text descriptions, provenance, exhibition history, and subject classifications. Additional rich media includes streaming audio and video files, links to related web content and multiple views.

The AMICO Library™ grows in size, depth and scope annually. Contributing Member Museums actively update and expand existing records as well as contribute additional records. AMICO Members understand that subscribers need access to the most extensive documentation possible, and work to meet those needs on an ongoing basis.


AMICO's Audiences

AMICO's mission is to enable the educational use of museum multimedia. This mission is centered on the effective delivery of The AMICO Library™ to four communities of subscribers: universities, K-12 (elementary and secondary) schools, public libraries and museums. AMICO currently serves over 3.5 million of these users worldwide. Each of these subscribers has selected to work with one or more of AMICO's five Distributors. This overview will be limited to the university and K-12 school audiences, since they are the primary focus of AMICO and its Distributors.

University Subscribers

Universities currently make up the majority of AMICO subscribers with over 250 subscribing institutions. Worldwide AMICO currently has subscribers in Australia, Canada, China, Israel, Lebanon, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and the United States. These subscribing universities serve about 2 million students.

K-12 Subscribers

K-12 schools have been publicly invited to subscribe to the AMIO Library since the fall of 2002. Since then, AMICO has acquired over seventy K-12 subscribers in North America. These subscribing schools currently serve almost 30,000 students annually. A number of the K-12 subscribers participate in AMICO through their membership in one or more consortia, such as New York's NyLink.


AMICO Distributors

Early in AMICO's formation it was determined that it was not effective for the organization to directly distribute The AMICO Library™ to end users, considering the infrastructure and staffing required to support such an effort. As a result, a Model Distribution Agreement was developed as a strategy for establishing formal working agreements with experienced distributors of digital resources to deliver The AMICO Library™ to subscribers (Bearman, Trant, 2002). This model gave AMICO the unique advantage of greatly reducing the consortium's requirement to provide delivery and support. More importantly, this model has allowed The AMICO Library™ to be delivered through a range of Distributors and interfaces, which provides a kind of laboratory for studies of user requirements and the effectiveness of software features.

Today, The AMICO Library™ is delivered worldwide through six major Distributors. Each of the Distributors is unique in its content offerings, interfaces and subscriber base. The following, in alphabetical order, is a summary of the current Distributors

Cartography Associates

(http://www.davidrumsey.com/amico/)

The publisher of The David Rumsey Historical Map Collection offers The AMICO Library™ through both the Luna Insight™ browser and java client interfaces. Cartography Associates provides access to the Rumsey and Japanese historical map collections as well as to The AMICO Library™. Cartography Associates began distributing The AMICO Library™ in 2002.

Sample Cartography Associates advanced search screen shot
Fig. 1: Sample Cartography Associates advanced search

Sample Cartography Associates returns page screen shot.
Fig. 2: Sample Cartography Associates returns page

H.W. Wilson

(http://www.hwwilson.com)

The publisher of Reader's Guide to Periodical Literature and many other popular journals, H.W. Wilson offers The AMICO Library™ as part of its WilsonWeb service that features a variety of resources of particular interest to schools and public libraries. Subscribers to The AMICO Library™ and other WilsonWeb databases are able to search simultaneously across these resources. H.W. Wilson began distributing The AMICO Library™ in 2000 and released a new version of its Wilson Web interface in early 2003.

Sample H.W. Wilson advanced search screen shot
Fig. 3: Sample H.W. Wilson advanced search

Sample H.W. Wilson returns page screen shot
Fig. 4: Sample H.W. Wilson returns page

OhioLINK

(http://www.ohiolink.edu)

The AMICO Library™ is accessible to students in the State of Ohio through the OhioLINK Consortium. Subscribers in Ohio will see The AMICO Library integrated into the OhioLINK Digital Media Center Art and Architecture Database. OhioLINK began distributing The AMICO Library™ in 1999.

Sample OhioLINK advanced search sceen shot
Fig. 5: Sample OhioLINK advanced search

Sample OhioLINK returns page screen shot
Fig. 6: Sample OhioLINK returns page

RLG, Inc.

(http://www.rlg.org)

RLG, Inc. (Research Libraries Group), a nonprofit research collections corporation, provides access to The AMICO Library™ through the RLG Eureka® interface also used to deliver many other art-related resources. RLG, Inc. began distributing The AMICO Library™ in 1999 and will be releasing a new version of its interface in early 2003.

Sample RLG advanced search screen shot
Fig. 7: Sample RLG advanced search

Sample RLG returns page screen shot
Fig. 8: Sample RLG returns page

University of Michigan

(http://www.umdl.umich.edu)

The University of Michigan distributes The AMICO Library™ as a component the U of M Networked Electronic Resources. These resources include over 80 other cross-searchable digital libraries and references and are distributed to its Ann Arbor, Flint and Dearborn campuses. Distribution of The AMICO Library™ and the other U of M Networked Electronic Resources is limited to Members of the University of Michigan System. The University of Michigan began distributing The AMICO Library™ in 2000.

Sample University of Michigan advanced search screen shot
Fig. 9: Sample University of Michigan advanced search

Sample University of Michigan returns page screen shot
Fig. 10: Sample University of Michigan returns page

VTLS

(http://www.vtls.com)
VTLS offers subscription access to The AMICO Library™ through a specially configured Chameleon iPortal web interface. The interface is integrated with the VTLS Hi-Res Image Navigator to provide the user with the ability to access detailed imagery in a variety of magnification sizes that they specify. Institutional subscribers using Z39.50 compliant integrated library systems will have the additional capability to configure access to The AMICO Library™ among their broadcast or aggregate search options. VTLS began distributing The AMICO Library™ in 2001.

Sample VTLS advanced search screen shot
Fig. 11: Sample VTLS advanced search

Sample VTLS returns page screen shot
Fig. 12: Sample VTLS returns page


Distributor Features and Functions

The AMICO Library™ is identical when received by each Distributor, but because each Distributor of The AMICO Library™ provides its own unique views and tools for working with the contents of The AMICO Library™, it supports different functions and has a different ‘feel'. Each Distributor is required to adhere to minimal display and indexing requirements as specified in the AMICO Distributor Specification. This specification also requires that all Distributors support searches of The AMICO Library™ by any of the following fields and combinations of a minimum of two of them:

  • Creator-Name
  • Creator-Nationality/Culture
  • Object-Type
  • Title
  • Creation-Date (CDT) and/or OCS/OCE
  • Materials and Techniques
  • Owner Name

In addition, AMICO requires all Distributors to provide access to a full-screen (1024 x 768) image, and options for accessing, multiple views, associated multimedia, linked structured text files, and audio and motion video files. Beyond these basic requirements, the specific views supported by each Distributor's interface differ based on Distributor-specific editorial and design decisions. These defined views then dictate the ways in which the underlying data is indexed as well as the scope of the surrounding features and functions.

The features and functions of each distribution of The AMICO Library™ dictates the ways in which subscribers can retrieve and utilize AMICO's contents. A number of user studies (Stebly 1998, Corbetta-Noyes 1998, Gay, Rieger 1999, Sho, Sengupta 2000) examine the features and functions desired by faculty and students when moving from traditional slides to digital media. Sho and Sengupta (2000) define the primary tasks involved in such activities as "search, select, record and use". While these tasks can be consistently performed in a traditional slide library, the tools available in a digital library environment significantly impact a users ability to perform these tasks. Simple procedures such as "browsing" and "setting images aside" are shown to be common requests (Stebly 1998, Sho, Sengupta 2000) but are not yet standard features and functions offered by every Distributor. Penn State's forthcoming Visual Image User Study (Pisciotta et al. 2001) promises to be the most comprehensive study to date and may define such standards in the higher education environment.

The following matrix provides a simplified outline of the key features and functions of each Distributor of The AMICO Library™. The information contained within this matrix is not meant to be comprehensive and represents the findings of a first pass inventory by the authors in order to identify similarities and differences between Distributors for further research and to assist in the development of future specifications.

Current AMICO Distributor's Features and Functions matrix image link
Fig. 13: Current AMICO Distributors' Features and Functions

Definition of Terms

The following defines the way in which the features and functions within the matrix were defined in the inventory.

Simple search - a query screen containing one single input box in which users can input a query term or string. Similar to a Google™ search, simple search screens give the impression of querying keywords or all fields, however it is never clear to the user exactly what is being queried and the results are dependent on the indexing strategies of each Distributor. Most Distributor's advanced searches also provide for some type of simple searching through such functions as search "All," "Keywords" or "Any Field".

Browse - a top-level screen that facilitates paging through the entire database or according to a field occurrence list such as "Nationality." All Distributors offer some browsing functionality after performing a query that returns multiple results. Most Distributors also provided browse as a top-level function or finding aid.

Thesaurus - a query interface that is built around a thesaurus or lexicon of terms that can be used for term expansion or refinement.

Advanced search - a search screen with two or more fields for composing queries and tools that allow for the selection of specific fields or concepts to be queried (i.e. creator/nationality).

  • Unlimited Boolean - the ability for the user to perform a complex Boolean query with an unlimited number of terms within a single field or multiple fields. Some Distributors provide a limited number of fields within the advanced search page, but allow for complex Boolean within them. Others do not permit Boolean operators within the field but provide interface tools for adding additional query components.
  • Keyword - a query option within the advanced search screen that allows the user to search an index of key terms defined by the Distributor.
  • Any field - a query option within the advanced search screen that similar to a keyword search allows the user to search across a number of fields simultaneously.
  • Authority lists - pull-down menu or pick-list of available controlled sets of terms for a field (e.g. artist name, creator culture).
  • Cat. Fields to query - number of fields that can be selected and directly queried in an advanced search.
  • Cat. Fields displayed - the maximum number of unique fields of data displayed for one record. The screen on which the maximum number fields are displayed differ from one Distributor to the next. In some cases it may be a "full record" view and in others the number of displayed fields can be controlled globally for all screens. Numbers are approximates based on items displayed rather than fields in the underlying database.
  • Sort results - the ability to select the order in which search results are displayed (i.e. by relevance, date, etc.)

Graphic tools - interface components that allow for manipulation of an image beyond basic viewing. While all Distributors provide functions for viewing different size images, some provide tools for functions such as zooming and panning.

Search history - a dynamically created log of all queries performed within a user session. Distributors offer different advanced functions for combining, saving and re-running past queries.

Query links - hyperlinks within search results that perform a query for the linked term when clicked (e.g. clicking Ojibwa in the creator culture field returns all Ojibwa created works).

Export text files - functions that allow the user to export records or search returns as formatted text files, HTML, spreadsheets or other text format. While most users can save pages as HTML or text through their browser's interface, some Distributors have included special tools for performing these functions.

Order TIFF files - the ability for end users to order high-resolution TIFF files of images in The AMICO Library™.

Integrated resources - one or more other electronic resources that can be queried simultaneously to The AMICO Library™. Interoperability with these resources can impact the overall available toolset.

Personal Grouping - a function allowing users to create and save custom sets of objects and related information. Some Distributors also refer to these functions as notebooks or groups.

  • Local - the ability to store a group on a local drive
  • Networked - the ability store a group on the Distributors server so it can be accessed via any authenticated user.
  • Sharable - the ability to "publish" a group so it is accessible and viewable by other subscribers.

Experience defines functionality

In some cases the range of other digital resources offered by the Distributors limits the available tools and views. The decision to provide interoperability between distributed resources may constrain options. Past experience in delivering those resources will inform the overall features and functions made available through a Distributor's interface. This is particularly relevant when it comes to the distribution of digital images and multimedia. Historically, most of the Distributors had focused on the delivery of text-based resources. Because of this, toolsets tend to be more refined to support interoperability between text-based resources than to support advanced functions related to the viewing and manipulation of other forms of rich media. Systems for delivery of digital images are often underdeveloped compared with those for delivering electronic text (Pisciotta et al. 2001). As more and more digital resources begin to incorporate rich media, Distributors will inevitably adjust their interfaces, features and functionality to fully address the potential applications of these new resources.

Degree of Apparent Inter-Application Consistency

Features common across most of the Distributors are the concepts of a single field "simple" search and a multiple field or Boolean "advanced" search. Colleen Skidmore and Sandra Dowie, (1999), suggest that simple query tools are best for novice computer users who may be overwhelmed by the complexities and myriad of options available with an advanced search. The University Testbed user survey (Gay & Rieger, 1999) found the "simple search" to be considered more useful than the advance search function.

Implementation of these tools and the indexing beneath them varies significantly between Distributors. While most "simple" searches are typically referred to as keyword searches, each Distributor has made independent decisions about which fields are contributing values to the "keyword" or generic string search index. Some Distributors define a simple search as "search all" while others refer to these as "keyword" searches. In both cases, the Distributors have selected and indexed a set of fields to correspond with available data and in the ways in which they believe end users will glean the most benefit. The concept of an "advanced" search also varies significantly between Distributors. One Distributor provides field specific querying for 32 fields of data plus "all" while another's "Search by Keyword" provides access to five fields (creation date, object type, title, subject, anywhere), two of which (anywhere and subject) are compound fields built by strategically indexing other underlying fields. All of these interfaces have advantages and disadvantages, from being too limited and mysterious to overwhelmingly complex. The availability and resulting functionality of these basic features impacts usability for different audiences and different applications as well as their satisfaction with the number of items their queries return.

In a study of the Museum Educational Site Licensing project (a collaboration of seven collecting institutions and seven universities) defining the terms and conditions for the educational use of digitized museum images and related information that was completed in 1977, Besser (1998) performed five queries against each distribution of the project. He found that these searches returned significantly different results. Figures 15 and 16 illustrate the consistency of results when the same set of queries is performed via the simple and advanced search interfaces of each of the six AMICO Distributors.

Results of Performing a Simple Search graph link
Fig. 14: Results of Performing a Simple Search

Each of the terms in Figure 14 was queried using the Distributor's simple search field. Where a Distributor lacked a simple search field, the search all or keyword function was used in the advanced search (see appendix 1 for details.)

Results of Performing a Advanced Search graph link
Fig. 15: Results of Performing a Advanced Search

The fields used for each advanced search was dependent upon the types of fields available to query. (See Appendix 1 for details.)

As compared with Besser's findings, there is substantially the same result from each search in each system. Nevertheless, there is some evidence of variation. Neither the statistical significance of this variation nor its correlation with Besser's findings was assessed for this preliminary examination. And while the many contributory sources for this variation are not the focus of this paper, a number of potential contributing variables can be identified. One of the largest variables was the way in which the authors performed the searches in each of the different distributions (see also Appendix 1). With significant variation in interface, indexing and functional definition between Distributors it is very difficult to perform an apples to apples comparison. Beyond these differences in user strategy there are a number of other more technical variables that are likely to have some impact on these findings.

Variables potentially influencing search returns

  1. Collection indexing methodology
  2. Text stemming capabilities
  3. Natural language capabilitie
  4. Number of fields available for query
  5. Keyword and "All Fields" search capabilities
  6. Boolean query capabilities
  7. Search engine capabilities

A Need for Additional Research

There are similarities as well as notable differences between the features and functions available through the Distributors of The AMICO Library™. With AMICO's focus on a diversity of audiences, K-12 through Higher Education, many questions remain in regards to the alignment between the available features and functions and the needs of the specific audiences. To date, most user research has been conducted in higher education environments that traditionally rely on slide presentations. Very little research has been conducted on the needs of K-12 and public library users. Because of this, it is likely that current Distributor features and functions cater more to the needs of higher education. Even so, all users are still struggling to define their needs while simultaneously defining new applications and rethinking traditional methodologies in the digital environment. Truly innovative uses of digital resources and the definition of related needs will not be possible until users are able to put hard copy metaphors aside.

The amount of experience users have with a resource can affect their ability to identify what they need from the resource. Without fully understanding the potential capabilities of a resource such as AMICO, users can't always identify which features and functions they desire. In this regard, education and training can serve as another variable that can have a significant positive impact on the perceived utility of a resource. Sayre and Wetterlund (2002) found that once K-12 teachers were shown capabilities of features and functions available in an online catalog of images, they were able to realize the potential of the functions. Prior to exploring these capabilities teachers were unable to describe the types of features and functions they might find useful. This suggests that asking teachers to describe desirable features and functions might be less effective than observing which features and functions are used over time, and to what end. Educators can find it difficult to imagine technological possibilities, but have no trouble imagining creative pedagogical possibilities for existing technology. The impact of these factors should be taken into consideration with all end users in designing future research.

Along with the evolving state of the end users is the continued progress in the cognitive and information sciences in developing more efficient, intelligent solutions for addressing users needs. In order to properly address these types of issues and opportunities, more rigorous formal research is imperative, including task sequence studies and usability analysis for each specified audience.

A rhetorical strategy suggests, on the basis of a rhetorical tree configuration, what shot segmentation and which transition effect should be applied. The strategies employed in the Torre Aquila multimedia guide were elicited by a focus group activity with a documentary director.

Conclusion

Dissemination of a single digital resource through multiple distributors is one model for addressing the needs of multiple audiences. The Art Museum Image Consortium has found this model to have many advantages, the most significant being exposure to a broader range of users. With a common set of data and multiple Distributors, The AMICO Library™ now offers a unique environment to assess the utility of different features and functions against the requirements of different user communities. The long-term success will be determined by taking full advantage of this virtual laboratory to strengthen the connections between content and its application. In the future, AMICO will continue to partner its Members, Subscribers and Distributors to take advantage of and share this tremendous opportunity to develop a greater understanding of networked delivery of digital cultural heritage information.

Appendix 1

Distributor Query Analysis matrix link

Fig. 16: Appendix 1: Distributor Query Analysis

 

References

AMICO Data Specification. http://www.amico.org/AMICOlibrary/dataspec.html

AMICO Distributor Specification. http://www.amico.org/distribute.html

AMICO Model Distribution Agreement. http://www.amico.org/distribute.html

ARS. Artist Rights Society. http://www.arsny.com

Categories for the Description of Works of Art, Edited by Murtha Baca and Patricia Harpring, The J. Paul Getty Trust & College Art Association, Inc. http://www.getty.edu/research/institute/standards/cdwa/index.html (The report of the Art Information Task Force.)

Bearman, D., Richmond, R. & Trant, J. (2002). Open Concepts: Museum Digital Documentation for Education Through The AMICO Library™, Art Libraries Journal, Volume 27, Number 2 http://www.amico.org/docs/papers/2002/ALJ.AMICO.paper.200202.pdf

Besser, H. (1998). MESL Implementation at the Universities, In C. Stephenson & P. McClung (Eds.) Delivering Digital Images: Cultural Heritage Resources for Education, The Museum Education Site Licensing Project volume 1, Getty Information Institute, Los Angeles, 1998

Corbetta-Noyes, L. (1998). Using Digital Images in the Classroom: User Survey Report. Research Libraries Group.

Gay, G. & Rieger, R, (1999). AMICO University Testbed User Survey, The Art Museum Image Consortium http://www.amico.org/univ/univtestbed/u.results.html

Pisciotta et al (2001). Penn State Visual Image User Study, D-Lib Magazine July/August 2001 Volume 7 Number 7/8
http://www.dlib.org/dlib/july01/pisciotta/07pisciotta.html

Sayre, S. & Wetterlund, K. (2002). Pyramid Power: A train-the-trainer model to increase teacher usage of the ArtsConnectEd on-line resource, In D. Bearman & J. Trant (Eds.) Museums and the Web, Selected papers from Museums and the Web 2002 . Pittsburgh: Archives & Museum Informatics. 177-148 http://www.archimuse.com/mw2002/papers/sayre/sayre.html

Sho, M. & Sengupta C. (2000). iselect: User study/Task analysis, School of Information Management and Systems (SIMS) University of California, Berkeley http://www.sims.berkeley.edu/academics/final-projects/iselect/index.html

Skidmore, C. & Dowie, S. (1999). Camera Lucida: AMICO in an Art History Classroom, Museums and the Web, New Orleans, Louisiana. http://www.archimuse.com/mw99/papers/dowie/dowie.html

Stebly, Lena (1998). Faculty Perspectives on Teaching with Digital Images in Besser, H. & Yamashita, R (eds.) The cost of digital image Distribution: The social and economic Implications of the Production, Distribution and Use of Image Data (A report to the Andrew H. Mellon Foundation), Berkeley School of Information Management and Systems

Trant, J. & Bearman, D. ( 1997). The Art Museum Image Consortium: Licensing Museum Digital Documentation for Educational Use, Spectra, Fall.
http://www.archimuse.com/papers/amico.spectra.9708.html

University of Michigan, Digital Library Service. http://www.umdl.umich.edu