01 / THE BLUEPRINT
The problem to investigate
A community collection may have object descriptions spread across notebooks and staff memory. Ask the collection’s custodians which records are missing and what should remain private. Public digitisation is not automatically appropriate for every object or story.
02 / THE BLUEPRINT
A possible solution
Create an internal record for an object identifier, description, custody history and unresolved provenance questions. Publish only a reviewed subset with appropriate attribution and permission. Distinguish a documented fact from an uncertain account.
03 / THE BLUEPRINT
Start without an app
A consistent paper register and better storage labels may solve the immediate problem. Adapt an existing museum catalogue workflow where possible. A new public website should follow, rather than lead, the documentation work.
04 / THE BLUEPRINT
Technology that could help
A small database, controlled image storage and versioned descriptions could support the catalogue. Use open export formats and accessible public pages. Do not rely on automated image recognition to establish identity, ownership or cultural meaning.
05 / THE BLUEPRINT
Your first experiment
- Ask custodians and relevant community representatives to define a small permitted scope.
- Prepare sample records using fictional or explicitly approved material.
- Test how volunteers record uncertainty and corrections.
- Review a few completed records before publishing any collection items.
06 / THE BLUEPRINT
People, resources and cost drivers
Resources include custodial expertise, community consultation and trained documentation time. Photography, translation, preservation and storage are costs. A catalogue cannot replace the specialist work needed to conserve fragile objects.
07 / THE BLUEPRINT
What to validate — and when to stop
Check consistency, provenance limits and whether permissions are documented. Pause publication when ownership or cultural concerns are unresolved. Do not treat a completed data field as proof that an object’s history is established.
08 / HYPOTHESIS TO TEST
Potential impact and how to measure it
The hypothesis is more retrievable, responsibly described records. Measure staff retrieval time, incomplete entries and corrected descriptions. Online engagement is not evidence that preservation improved or that the collection’s community approved every use.
09 / THE BLUEPRINT
Risks and safeguards
Some records may expose sacred knowledge, valuable locations or contested ownership. Let custodians control visibility and removal. Record permission boundaries for images and stories, and avoid publishing private donor or community contact details.
10 / THE BLUEPRINT
Who might pay or maintain it
A museum or transparent cultural grant might fund maintenance. Plan staff handover, exports and backup checks. Avoid a catalogue that becomes inaccessible when a volunteer leaves or a short-term software subscription ends.