A. Metadata models for electronic art

Transcription

1 Deliverable 1.3 Description models for unstable media art 1. Introduction A. Metadata models for electronic art As demonstrated in Deliverable 1.1, many different data models exist for the description of the practice of electronic art. Every electronic art center or institution that maintains a database for archival purposes, has applied a different data model depending on its goals and mission, availability of financial means and personnel and the relative importance attached to the archival project within the institution as a whole. Setting up and maintaining an archive has only recently become a priority in the very young field of electronic art; in terms of standardization, a lot of work still needs to be done. V2_Archive has, since its inception in 2000, served as an international example for other archival projects in the field of unstable media art. V2_ has developed an unconventional description model for its archive, using an object-relation instead of a record-based approach. This results in an unusual perspective on metadata; single objects in the archive are described in an atomic way and can become metadata for other objects by establishing interrelations between them. Figure 1. Schematic visualization of the basic principles of V2_Archive's objectrelation metadata structure V2_Organisation Capturing Unstable Media 1

2 For a complete overview of the object and relation types currently used in V2_'s archival metadata model, please refer to Appendix 1. Advantages of such an object-relation approach include: - Flexibility. By applying a metadata model of atomic objects and relations, it becomes possible to cluster these objects in a variety of ways, depending on the specific requirements of the application in which the data is presented. Because of this flexibility, for example, it becomes more easily possible to map the data in V2_'s archive to standards and description models used by other organizations. Furthermore, it becomes possible to adapt the data to the requirements of a wide variety of interfaces for different target users and different purposes. - The data are organized in a principally non-hierarchical way; the information in the archive is stored in a multidimensional cloud of objects and relations with no inherent hierarchy. Hierarchical relations are not in-built in the system. Nevertheless, it is possible to construct hierarchies in a flexible way, e.g. for indicating hierarchies in a thesaurus. For technical solutions and implementations in this area, please refer to Deliverable 2.2 (Implementation). B. Problematic metadata aspects for capturing unstable media In the context of the research project "Capturing Unstable Media," V2_Archive has researched a number of specific metadata aspects, targeted towards capturing the most essential characteristics of activities related to unstable media. The problematic aspects that were researched, described below, are intended to be compatible with various other approaches in the field of capturing and preserving electronic media art, such as - The actual preservation of 'captured' objects. Defining strategies for collecting and preserving actual works is outside the scope of this research project, but the development of a conceptual model and specific metadata models and instruments here should be considered complementary to existing and future approaches to preservation. - The Variable Media Initiative is a specific example of a recently developed approach to preservation of "variable media" works. The Variable Media approach is also metadata-oriented and provides a framework for the description of appearances of a work that are subject to change (e.g. because of consecutive exhibitions), together with the registration of acceptable variables within aspects of this work, defined in dialogue with the artist and other specialists. Specifically, the Variable Media Initiative has defined a list of possible behaviors of a work whose parameters may vary to a certain extent (i.e. contained, duplicated, encoded, installed, interactive, networked, performed). The Capturing Unstable Media Conceptual Model (CMCM, see deliverable 1.2) and the researched metadata proposals should be considered complementary to this approach; while the Variable Media approach focuses on outlining and registering the variability of a work, the researched aspects in Capturing Unstable Media are meant to integrate the overall description of the entire work's activity history with the precise description and documentation of problematic aspects. Within a metadata-oriented approach to capturing unstable media projects and activities, the following aspects have appeared to be problematic. These aspects will be explained further in this deliverable. - Terminology: keywords and genres. In the young field of electronic art, there is still a lack of established, agreed-upon terminology for describing the content of works, projects, activities and documents. V2_Organisation Capturing Unstable Media 2

3 During the last few years, V2_ has developed a proposal for a thesaurus for electronic art, which has been further elaborated during the course of this research project. Furthermore, the need for a good vocabulary for describing types and genres of documentation has become apparent; the definition and description of documentation genres has been a significant aspect of this research trajectory. - Behavior, activity and dependencies of projects and works: interaction, distributed authorship, hardware and software dependencies. User interaction is an important characteristic of many unstable media works, but it has proven difficult to describe and capture this interaction in a generic and objective way. This research project has resulted in a first proposal for such metadata. Furthermore, an attempt has been made to describe the very diverse modes of distributed authorship of a work and to describe, in a basic way, the dependencies of a work on hardware and software components. V2_Organisation Capturing Unstable Media 3

4 2. Keywords A thesaurus for electronic art A. V2_'s thesaurus Starting from mid-2000, V2_Organisation has been developing a specific thesaurus for electronic art, in the English language only, focusing on the art projects and activities that were featured at V2_ during the past two decades. In Spring 2003, this thesaurus contains more than 700 keywords, with a specific emphasis on V2_'s history from 1993 till present. Instead of maintaining a shorter thematic list of broad categories and themes, V2_ has chosen to develop a detailed, elaborate and flexible thesaurus structure that can function as a semantic network, structuring the archive's data in a multidimensional, precise manner. Most keywords are related to a manageable number of archival items (an average of four or five) and form meaningful clusters with other, closely related terms and archival objects. The detailed keywords often provide interesting and unexpected links between otherwise unrelated archival items. The list of keywords was built through a combination of the "top-down" and "bottom-up" methods for thesaurus construction. As top-down methodology, existing thesauri (see below) were used as inspiration for the basic structure and for many relationships within V2_'s thesaurus. Besides this, most of the terms were derived from actual (bottom-up) analysis of V2_'s archive data. In order to maintain the thesaurus' consistency, only one person (V2_'s media archivist) has been in charge of construction and maintenance. In Spring 2003, V2_'s thesaurus has been subject to a thorough update, preparing it for external feedback and exchange. In V2_'s archive, keywords are attached to (art)works, projects, publications, texts and activities, not to actors (people or organizations). In the future, keywords might be applied to actors as well. The thesaurus has a standardized structure and uses the default thesaurus relations: - use [U] - use for [UF] - related term [RT] - narrower term [NT] - broader term [BT] In addition, V2_'s thesaurus uses three nonstandard relations, designed for enabling more precise definitions of semantic relations between keywords. - triggers can be mapped to related term [RT] - synonym can be mapped to use [U] - antonym can be mapped to related term [RT] Compared to other thesauri, V2_'s thesaurus features a much larger number of associative or horizontal relations (related term, triggers, antonym), emphasizing its function as a semantic network. In V2_'s thesaurus, nouns are included in plural, following the conventions of the library world (in the museum field, singular nouns are sometimes used). A few definitions of specific thesaurus terminology can be found in the glossary. V2_'s thesaurus can be browsed at V2_'s archive portal 1 (see also Deliverable V2_Archive Thesaurus. December V2_Organisation. 31 December 2003 < V2_Organisation Capturing Unstable Media 4

5 Implementation); an export of the thesaurus can be obtained from V2_'s archive team on simple request 2. (1) Parallels with other thesauri In its overall structure, V2_'s thesaurus is largely inspired by other vocabularies. The main sources of inspiration for its construction are the Art and Architecture Thesaurus by the Getty Research Institute 3 and WordNet, developed by the Cognitive Science Laboratory at Princeton University 4. Some terminology related to Internet technology is drawn from, and structured like, the ASIS Thesaurus of Information Science, maintained by the American Society for Information Science and Technology 5. The hierarchical structure ([NT] and [BT] relations) of V2_'s thesaurus is, to a large extent, modeled after the Art and Architecture Thesaurus. The AAT's hierarchy offers a series of very useable abstract top-level categories, discussed below. The main hierarchical branches of both thesauri are similar, although in most cases AAT goes into more detail; the branches of V2_'s thesaurus are more compressed, omitting unnecessary so-called "guide terms". In general, V2_ tries to avoid the use of these guide terms wherever possible, since these make a thesaurus less accessible from an end user's perspective. The Art and Architecture Thesaurus was the main inspiration for V2_'s thesaurus for the following reasons: - In the art world, the AAT has become and extremely widely used standard. Therefore, it would be wise to strive for integration of specific electronic art terminology in the AAT; modeling an independent electronic art thesaurus after the AAT is a first step for this. - Compared to other, more specifically discipline-oriented thesauri, the Art and Architecture Thesaurus offers sufficiently abstract top-level hierarchies for enabling wide adaptation (see above). - The Art and Architecture Thesaurus features a surprisingly large number of terms in the technical, scientific and interdisciplinary field, which are very useable in the context of electronic art. - The AAT offers excellent keyword hierarchies for the names of scientific (alpha, beta and gamma) disciplines and for their related concepts. WordNet, in fact, is not a real thesaurus, but a lexical reference system representing semantics in the English language. For the construction of V2_'s thesaurus, it is very helpful in providing associative terminology for each keyword. (2) Top-level structure As mentioned above, V2_'s thesaurus is very similar to the Art and Architecture Thesaurus in its main hierarchical structure. 2 For this purpose, an can be sent to archive@v2.nl. 3 Getty Research Institute: Art and Architecture Thesaurus. Art and Architecture Thesaurus. December Getty Research Institute. 31 December 2003 < 4 Cognitive Science Laboratory, Princeton University: WordNet. WordNet. December Cognitive Science Laboratory, Princeton University. 31 December 2003 < 5 American Society for Information Science: ASIS Thesaurus of Information Science. ASIS Thesaurus of Information Science. December American Society for Information Science. 31 December 2003 < V2_Organisation Capturing Unstable Media 5

6 AAT's top level categories (or facets) are the following 6 (as of 26 May 2003): Associated Concepts Physical Attributes - Attributes and Properties - Conditions and Effects - Design Elements - Color Styles and Periods Agents - People - Organizations Activities - Disciplines - Functions - Events - Physical and Mental Activities - Processes and Techniques Materials Objects - Object Groupings and Systems - Object Genres - Components - Built Environment - Furnishings and Equipment - Visual and Verbal Communication V2_'s thesaurus features the following top-level categories: Concepts Properties Agents - Biological Agents - Artificial Agents - Groups Activities - Disciplines - Functions - Events - Physical and Mental Activities - Processes and Techniques Materials Objects - Systems - Object Genres - Components - Built Environment - Furnishings and Equipment - Visual and Verbal Communication Geographical Locations Themes - V2_Organisation Themes - V2_Lab Themes Table 1: Comparison between the AAT's and V2_'s top level hierarchies The main differences between AAT's and V2_'s top-level hierarchies are the following. - Agents. For AAT, agents are by default 'human agents' while in electronic art, a lot of terminology about artificial agents (robots, cyborgs) is common. Apart from this, V2_'s thesaurus contains some entries on animal and plant life, since these sometimes form part of (or are the subject of) electronic artworks. AAT does not contain keywords related to animal and plant life. - Styles and Periods. This hierarchy is important in an art historical thesaurus, but does not play a role for electronic art, since this is mostly discussed in terms of themes, not style characteristics. - Geographical Locations. V2_'s thesaurus contains a hierarchy branch of relevant geographical locations, which is interrelated with other keywords in the thesaurus (e.g. Israel Judaism). The Art and Architecture Thesaurus contains no geographical locations; Getty Research 6 See V2_Organisation Capturing Unstable Media 6

7 has developed a separate thesaurus (the Getty Thesaurus of Geographic Names) for those. - Themes. Specific themes, coined by V2_Organisation, such as the yearly themes (Machine Times, Data Knitting) and the themes of V2_Lab (Tactile User Interfaces). (3) Electronic art: specific terminology The field of electronic art is unique in its extreme interdisciplinarity. Unlike strictly disciplinebased, often scientific thesauri, a thesaurus for electronic art will typically cover an extremely broad range of terms, related to many aspects of contemporary society, from architecture and transportation to Internet technology, from politics and activism to medical science. For most of these fields and disciplines, an electronic art thesaurus will not go into small detail but rather include general terminology. In an electronic art thesaurus, specific emphasis lies on technology-oriented terminology; from all the disciplines covered in the interdisciplinary field of electronic art, engineering and computer science are represented in most detail. These terms also reflect historical technical evolutions from the past decades. Examples are: virtual reality and VRML, browsers, telerobotics, telematics, antennas, wearable technology... The field of electronic art also has, to some extent, generated its own specific terminology, which cannot be found in other disciplines 7. These are the terms that, someday, will require integration in a broader arts-related thesaurus such as the Art and Architecture Thesaurus. Examples of these terms are - terms coined by thinkers in postmodernism, media and electronic art e.g. dromology (Paul Virilio) - electronic culture jargon: telepresence, tactical media, electronic civil disobedience, cyberfeminism, Deep Europe, avatars, cyborgs... B. Thesaurus interoperability An inventory of related archives (see Deliverable 1.1) has shown that V2_Archive is, for now, the only archival initiative in the field of electronic media art which maintains an extensive thesaurus as described above. Other institutions most notably Netzspannung and the Daniel Langlois Foundation maintain a flat, nonhierarchical and shorter keyword list. Interest for developing an interoperable and flexibly applicable thesaurus with commonly agreed terminology is growing in the field. V2_Archive could play an important role in this development, because of its experience with thesaurus construction and use. Such an undertaking is outside the scope of this research project, but could be the subject of future international collaboration between several institutions. An interoperable thesaurus should, ideally, consist of an extensible core set of terminology, interrelated in a thesaurus hierarchy and described by scope notes agreed by the participating institutions. Such a core terminology set should be - Compatible with older, established thesauri in closely related fields; most notably the Getty's Art and Architecture Thesaurus; - Extensible by the individual participating institutions, so that institution-specific terminology can be used in a flexible way. 7 See also the Dictionnaire des Arts Médiatiques Groupe de recherche en arts médiatiques, Université du Québec à Montreal. 31 December 2003 < which contains a French-language glossary with definitions and English translations. V2_Organisation Capturing Unstable Media 7

8 (1) Daniel Langlois Foundation: a test case In the course of 2003, V2_Archive and the Centre for Research and Documentation of the Daniel Langlois Foundation have exchanged information and expertise about their respective terminology projects. A comparison between both keyword lists has led to the following insights: - V2_'s thesaurus contains more than 800 interrelated keywords; the Daniel Langlois Foundation maintains a flat list of 233 keywords, including synonyms. None of both keyword lists include scope notes. - The scopes of both keyword lists overlap. V2_'s thesaurus consists of terms related to its activities, which span from 1981 to the present, with an important focus on electronic media art. The Daniel Langlois Foundation's keyword list describes the documentation and resources in its Centre for Research and Documentation, which also focuses on electronic and media art, but with a slightly broader scope both in subject (including a broader notion of "media art) and time (roughly from the 1960s till present). While the latter keyword list mainly consists of general themes (hence its smaller number of keywords), V2_'s thesaurus offers more detail and more excursions in specific areas of knowledge. - The keyword lists have (as of Spring 2003) 99 keywords in common meaning that those keywords are exactly the same. This means that 42% of the Daniel Langlois Foundation's keyword list overlaps 12% of V2_'s thesaurus. This overlap is undoubtedly significant enough to make a joint effort in thesaurus development and interoperability feasible. A report of a visit to the Daniel Langlois Foundation in June 2003 can be found in Appendix 2. The keywords used by the Centre for Research and Documentation of the Daniel Langlois Foundation (Spring 2003) with overlapping keywords indicated in bold are listed in Appendix 3. V2_Organisation Capturing Unstable Media 8

9 3. Genres As part of the research project Capturing Unstable Media, V2_ has thoroughly researched documentation strategies, documentation types and their use for capturing the essential characteristics of unstable media art. More information about this research on documentation strategies can be found in Deliverable 1.2 Capturing Unstable Media. One result of this research trajectory is a proposal for a semi-hierarchical list of documentation genres. During the research, it became clear that there is much confusion and lack of clarity about which types and genres of documentation exist, and how these can be put to good use in the context of capturing, archiving and preservation of unstable media art. Types of documentation refer to the physical characteristics of the document is it a piece of video, audio, text, an image or a hybrid? (see Deliverable 1.2, section on the Capturing Unstable Media Conceptual Model). Genres of documentation refer to the content of the document typical examples of genres would be an interview, a meeting report, a walkthrough. A semi-hierarchical list overview of the documentation genres used in the context of the case studies of this research project can be found in appendix 4 of this deliverable. Definitions of the abovementioned genres can be found in the glossary for this research project. V2_Organisation Capturing Unstable Media 9

10 4. Distributed authorship The established differences between author and reader, performer and spectator, creator and interpreter become blurred and give away to reading writing continuum that extends from the designers of the technology and networks to the final recipient, each one contributing to the activity of the other the disappearance of the signature. 8 New media art] practice challenges the notion of authorship, has to do with collective authorship; non western ideas of discourse is something the museum has always had trouble with. And what has happened on the net is a brain of a social collectivity, that allows discursive practice... How do you support and preserve a critical practice that is inclusive... how can you do that when it is difficult to pin down authorship? 9 A typical characteristic of unstable media art (or electronic art) is the fact that artistic projects are very often created by large, interdisciplinary groups of collaborators. It is often not possible or desirable anymore to attribute authorship of a project to a single person or artists' group; rather, a more refined system for attribution of participation in a project is needed. Furthermore, there is still a lot of confusion on the terminology that is used for describing certain roles in a project. An example: should one speak about a programmer, or a software developer, or a software designer? Is there any difference between these three functions? Film production is a typical domain where in a similar way, large groups of contributors with specific functions collaborate in an interdisciplinary way. In this domain, an established, elaborated terminology 10 for these functions already exists; there is a lot to be learned from this. In this research project, recommendations for correct authorship attributions were made. Where possible, authorship should be attributed to the correct aspects or sub-activities of a project, as outlined in the Capturing Unstable Media Conceptual Model (CMCM), which was discussed in Deliverable 1.2, thus creating a distributed model of authorship attribution. A list of authorship roles related to the case studies of this research project can be found below. Role _ concept _ choreography / choreographer _ development / developer _ software development / developer _ hardware development / developer _ visual design(er) _ interaction design(er) _ performance / performer _ dance / dancer _ management / manager _ coordination / coordinator _ production / producer / production manager in entities project choreography (various) software hardware (various - design) interface design performance performance project / occurrence project / occurrence project / occurrence 8 Levy, Pierre. Becoming Virtual: Reality in the Digital Age. New York: Plenum Press, 1988, p Diamond, Sara, in talk on conference Sins of Change, November Citation from: Beryl Graham and Sarah Cook. A Curatorial Resource for Upstart Media Bliss. 31 December 2003 < 10 Internet Movie Database Movie Terminology Database. December Internet Movie Database. 31 December 2003 < V2_Organisation Capturing Unstable Media 10

11 manager _ technical design(er) _ software design(er) _ hardware design(er) _ sound / audio design(er) _ manufacturer _ author _ participating author _ editor _ editor in chief _ publisher _ music / composer _ moderation / moderator _ speaker _ participant (various) software hardware audio hardware, software publication publication publication publication publication audio meeting, presentation presentation meeting Table 2: Listing of authorship roles and their applicability to CMCM entities Definitions of the various authorship roles in this list can be found in the glossary. V2_Organisation Capturing Unstable Media 11

12 5. Hardware and software dependencies In Deliverable 1.2, the basic structure of the Capturing Unstable Media Conceptual Model (CMCM) was explained. The concepts in this conceptual model are defined in the glossary of this research project. An important aspect of capturing an electronic art project is outlining the way in which a project has evolved and functioned, both in general and specific ways. In general, a description of the different phases and 'states' of a single project should be outlined clearly. Has the project been shown in different ways at different locations? Which important research and development trajectories have fed the project? These aspects were dealt with in the CMCM at the project and occurrence level; occurrences such as PublicInstallation, Application, Performance, Meeting, Presentation and R&DPeriod are intended to describe such phases and states and were sufficiently explained in Deliverable 1.2. More specifically, on a detailed level, it should, where possible, also be made clear how an occurrence has functioned. How did the different components of an occurrence (e.g. a Performance or a PublicInstallation) work together? In the Capturing Unstable Media research project, an attempt was made to create a formal description model that is generic enough to be able to accommodate a wide variety of possible occurrences and components. A. Outline of dependencies and relations In Appendix 5, an outline of possible dependencies and relations between an occurrence's separate components can be found. It is not sufficient to just outline the components themselves, since this would not correctly capture the way in which an occurrence has functioned. As discussed in Deliverable 1.2 (section on documentation vs. modeling), this functioning can partly be described through documentation, but it is also useful to formalize it in a model in a more generic way, so that several occurrences of different projects can be compared more easily. In the current version of the Capturing Unstable Media Conceptual Model, a series of possible interrelations and dependencies are outlined as described, in natural language, in Appendix 5. It should be repeated, in this context, that the CMCM is intended as a conceptual model only, as an ontology intended for outlining concepts according to which individual institutions can map their own concepts in their data collection. What is described in Appendix 5 is a set of recommendations that can be implemented by institutions according to their own data models; for some data collections, a selection of the following concepts could be implemented as metadata fields, for other data collection some concepts may be implemented as relations or slots. Only interrelations between project entities (levels Project, Occurrence, Component) are discussed; other interrelations (with actors, interaction levels et al.) were discussed elsewhere in this Deliverable, or in Deliverable 1.2. For definitions of the CMCM concepts, see the general glossary. The dependencies and interrelations are described in natural language; for more formal descriptions (slot names), please consult the HTML export of the CMCM ontology. Only the dependencies for the most low-level entities were described, because these are typically the concrete entity classes that have most instances. V2_Organisation Capturing Unstable Media 12

13 B. Explanation of selected dependencies Most of the entities and dependencies described in Appendix 5 should be clearly understandable without further explanation. Two entities, though, need to be explained because they have a specific function within the model, namely SystemsDesign and Configuration. Both SystemsDesign and Configuration are entities in the CMCM that should be used for expressing meaningful clusters of components of an occurrence. It is often necessary to describe how a well-defined group of technical components work together. A small cluster of technical components is a Configuration. This usually consists of a piece of Hardware often a Computer -, with specific Software installed on it (both an OperatingSystem and SoftwareApplication(s)) and with a specific Network setup. A large cluster of technical entities is a SystemsDesign or, in short, a system. This may consist of one or several Configuration(s) and/or one or more piece(s) of Hardware. Configuration and SystemsDesign are conceptual clusterings of actual components. Both entities were created in order to explain the specific interrelations between groups of components in a clearer way; often, dedicated documentation exists for such clusters (see the section on documentation genres in Deliverable 1.2). Figure 2 below explains the possibilities for indicating dependencies between an Occurrence with either SystemsDesign or Configuration or both; an Occurrence can either be described by including both a general SystemsDesign including several Configuration (1); or by one or more Configurations (2); or through a SystemsDesign with individual Components (3). V2_Organisation Capturing Unstable Media 13

14 Figure 2. Three models for describing dependencies between Occurrence, SystemsDesign, Configuration and Components. C. Unanswered questions The proposed model for describing interrelations between captured entities should be considered as a first demonstration. A number of unanswered issues are still open for further research. Examples of such issues: - How to deal with generic and specifically designed entities? In electronic art projects, a mix of off-the-shelf technologies and specially designed components is often used. In the current model, both categories of technologies are described in the same way, while they should be treated differently. - It is still difficult to describe the exact procedures and content of input and output in a system; the current model deals with this in a basic way (describing the technical components that take care of input and output), but there is not yet a way of V2_Organisation Capturing Unstable Media 14

15 registering and modeling the specific data, content and behavior of what exactly is 'put into' or 'out of' the system. V2_Organisation Capturing Unstable Media 15

16 6. Metadata for interaction Electronic art is characterized by its acclaimed interactivity by the fact that users are able to interact with works, to influence input and output and to become active participants rather than spectators. The interactive nature of such a work and the precise way in which users can interact with it is often essential to it, but very difficult to capture. In this research project, an attempt was made to research the nature of interactivity and the possibility to formally describe this so that capturing interaction becomes (at least partially) possible. A. Interactivity and (user) interaction: terminology and scopes The concepts of interactivity and (user) interaction are used in a variety of contexts; it is important to clarify what they exactly mean and which term would be preferable under which circumstances. Interactivity is a vague, a bit hype-laden and all-encompassing term, in part because it has become such a descriptive 'feature' in the marketing of computer technology, in part because it is inherent in the very operation of computer technology. Scholars have employed the term to refer to everything from face-to-face exchanges to computer-mediated communication. However, much of the literature, both popular and scholarly, uses the term interactivity with few or no attempts to define it. What follows is a non-comprehensive, overview of different aspects of interactivity that have been discussed in literature. In his essay on the archaeology of interactivity 11, Erkki Huhtamo reveals the two historical polarities that led to the development of interactive systems. He argues that, on the one hand, they evolved out of mechanized systems and robotics, seeking a constant interplay between man and machine. On the other hand they are part of the gradual development of the computer from ideas that were first discussed in connection with automation and cybernetics in the 1950s and 1960s, in the context of automated functions where large amounts of data were fed into mainframe computers and man awaited the answer of the computers. As the machines became more sophisticated, it was possible to intervene in the computer process and see the result of this intervention in real time. So, a kind of control function emerged: a one-way command communication from the operator to the machine. Paradoxically, the idea of interactivity as control, as interface manipulation, is somewhat at odds with the idea of interaction as a mutually reciprocal communication process, either between a user an a machine/database or between user and user. From a Communication Studies point of view, the degrees of interaction are further split up into the kinds of communication that occur with CMC (computer mediated communication). Communicative behaviors are classified according to their similarity to, or difference from, face-to-face dialogue. For communication theorists interaction is a quality present in varying degrees as a quality of communication 12. Similarly the modes of interactivity could be classified on a scale of least to most interactive, with the various kinds of computer mediated communication 'most' interactive and navigational choices 'least' interactive. 11 Huhtamo, Erkki. "From Cybernation to Interaction: a Contribution to an Archaeology of Interactivity." The Digital Dialectic. Ed. Peter Lunenfeld. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, Hannon, John and Pam Atkins. All about interactivity Enhancing Interactivity in Online Learning, a TAFE Frontiers project. 31 December 2003 < V2_Organisation Capturing Unstable Media 16

17 Other theorists 13, such as Landow (1992) understood interactivity as placing authorship in the hands of the 'reader' or consumer. Users of new media would be able to navigate their way across uncharted seas of potential knowledge, making their own sense of a body of material. More recently, more critical estimations have been made regarding the power of choice of the viewer, claiming that every option of the viewer is actually planned by the artist 14. This view is taken to its extreme by the Russian theorist Lev Manovich, who, in his meaningfully entitled 1996 essay "On Totalitarian Interaction" 15, takes the extreme position that interactivity is in fact a form of manipulation by the artist. The literature on interactivity includes many assumptions and some definitions but few tools for operationalizing the concept of interactivity in computer-mediated environments 16. An extensive body of literature exists about interaction in human communication, while other research examines interaction of human beings with computers or computer based interactivity. This literature grows out of the computer science tradition and focuses on improving the interface of computer hardware and software. So, for this research, it appears to be important to make a clear distinction between 'interactivity' and 'interaction'. Wagner (1994, 1997) proposes a distinction between both terms. Like Gilbert and Moore 17, she says that "interaction" is an interplay and exchange in which individuals and groups influence each other. Thus, interaction is when there are "reciprocal events requiring two objects and two actions (p. 20). On the other hand, she says "interactivity" seems to have emerged from "descriptions of technological capability for establishing connections from point-to-point in realtime" (p. 20). Thus, interaction focuses on people s behaviors, while interactivity focuses on characteristics of the technology systems. In this research project, preference will be given to the term "interaction" due to its more neutral and general scope. In analogy with Pip Laurenson 18, who stresses that the description of the state of a timebased media work needs to focus on its state as an installed event, this research project first looks at the visual parts of the interaction. Interaction is about 'doing', about action and response, whether to a computer interface, to a person or persons, or to the surrounding location (or objects in that surrounding location). It suggests reciprocal action or influence, and has the sense of "activity" taking place between (inter) two positions. How is it possible to describe the different modes of interaction used in electronic art in a more structural way? An interaction model should cover the nature of human actors in an electronic artwork, but also the technological system involved in the action, which mediates between the two positions. Michael Yacci offers a structural approach towards interaction in a mediated environment (in his case a distance education and learning environments) 19. He states that, "structurally, interactivity is a circuit of messages flowing from an originating entity to a target entity and 13 Lister, Martin, et al. New Media: A Critical Introduction. London: Routledge, 2003, Lister, Martin, et al. New Media: A Critical Introduction. London: Routledge, 2003, Manovich, Lev. On Totalitarian Interactivity December 2003 < 16 Downes, Edward J. and Sally J. McMillan. Defining interactivity: a qualitative identification of key dimensions. New Media & Society 2(2), 2002: Gilbert, Larry and David Moore. Building interactivity in web courses: Tools for social and instructional interaction. Educational Technology, Vol 38 (3). May-June Laurenson, Pip. Current research in the conservation and management of time-based media collections. A talk given at V2_, 18 July, Yacci, Michael. Interactivity Demystified: A Structural Definition for Distance Education and Intelligent CBT. Educational Technology, August December 2003 < V2_Organisation Capturing Unstable Media 17

18 then returning back to the originating entity. This can be referred to as an interactive loop. Entities in an interactive loop can be students, instructors, computers, or other media capable of receiving and sending messages". Such a message loop is an ideal starting point for an interaction model for electronic art. Entity_2 Entity_1 Figure 3: a completed message loop between two entities 'Message' in an interactive loop refers not only to spoken messages but also to overt physical activities that are directly perceived by either entity. Gavora and Hannafin 20 describe the operation of interaction as consisting of a physical response and feedback based on the response, hence describing a loop. However, their definition also says that "a physical response, by itself, is neither a necessary nor sufficient condition for interaction." It is not clear how one sends a message without overt behavior of some form. Therefore, by our definition, a physical response is a necessary condition of interaction. A final attribute in Yacci's definition of interaction is the mutual coherence of messages. This term is used to describe the relationship between a message and its response. However, in electronic art this relationship is often unclear, so in that context it is not a necessary attribute of interaction. Additionally, E. Downes and S. McMillan 21 define several dimensions of interaction in two main categories: message dimensions and participant dimensions. Message dimensions include the direction of communication, temporal flexibility and sense of place. Participant dimensions include level of control, responsiveness and perceived purpose of communication. Beryl Graham's Ph.D. research 22 and Nathan Shedroff 23 also provide some additional aspects that relate to a structural model for interaction in electronic artworks. Shedroff distinguishes level of control, which means 'the satisfying power to take meaningful action and see the results of our decisions and choices'. Another aspect is 'Communications', describing the channel/connection in use for communication purposes. B. Proposal for an interaction model In the currently developed model for capturing an unstable media work, the following parameters of interaction are described. These parameters were chosen for their universal 20 Gavora, M. and Michael J. Hannafin. Perspectives on the design of interaction strategies. Presented at the annual meeting of the Association for the Development of Computer-Based Instructional Systems. Nashville, TN, February Downes, Edward J. and Sally J. McMillan. Defining interactivity: a qualitative identification of key dimensions. New Media & Society 2(2), 2002: Graham, Beryl. A study of audience relationships with interactive computer-based visual artworks in gallery settings, through observation, art practice, and curation. Unpublished. Ph.D. thesis, University of Sunderland, December 2003 < 23 Shedroff, Nathan. What is Interactivity Anyway? 31 December 2003 < V2_Organisation Capturing Unstable Media 18

19 nature they are applicable to and meaningful for many modes of interaction and because they can be defined rather objectively. 1. Time flexibility or interaction synchronicity. Possible values: - Scheduled - Not scheduled This parameter indicates whether the interaction needs or needed to take place at a specific, fixed moment in time. This is typically the case for performances; exhibited or online works are typically not scheduled and can be experienced by an interacting user at any time (provided that the work is installed or present). 2. Interaction location. Possible values: - Specific location - Undefined location This parameter indicates whether the interaction happens or happened at a specific physical location. For installations and performances, this is typically the case, while, for example, online projects can be experienced by users at any location (e.g. at home). 3. User number. Possible values: - Single user - Group user - Audience This parameter gives a rough indication about the types of groupings the interaction needs. user number minumum, maximum, group user, single user, audience. 4. Minimum number of users 5. Maximum number of users 6. Interaction level. Possible values: - Observational - Navigational - Participatory - Co-authoring - Intercommunication This parameter indicates the intensity of the interaction. 7. Sensory mode. Possible values: - Visual - Auditive - Olfactory - Tactile - Gustative This parameter indicates which of the user's senses are activated during the interaction. C. Minimal values For one single project occurrence, many types of interaction are often possible. The occurrence (e.g. an interactive installation) can be experienced by a single user but also by a group of users, watched by an audience. The occurrence may be designed for visual perception only (e.g. a painting) but may, unexpectedly, invite visitors to touch the object. Visitors or users may use an occurrence in many unexpected and unintended ways. It is impossible to track down and describe all these possible uses of an occurrence; this would make the description of various interaction models a very complicated task. Therefore, the description of interaction with an occurrence should refer to the minimal interaction that is needed for the occurrence to function as its creator has intended. For the various interaction parameters, this means: V2_Organisation Capturing Unstable Media 19

20 - What is the minimum number of users? If the interaction succeeds with only one user, then the interaction is single user, even if it can happen with a group of people, watched by an audience. Therefore, it is also important, where relevant, to mention the minimum and maximum number of users. - Sensory mode: also the minimum / intended by the artist - Interaction location: only indicate this if it's really necessary - Interaction synchronicity: idem - Interaction level: indicate minimum intensity for the interaction to succeed, only indicate intercommunication if necessary / conceptually intended A few schematically represented examples: Figure 4. Schematic representations of types of interaction D. Other parameters of interaction The abovementioned interaction model offers a simple and basic structure for describing essential characteristics of user interaction with a specific work. However, many aspects of such an interaction are less easily to describe in a formal way. In future research, it is important to take these parameters into account as well. It is to be expected that more complex mechanisms for capturing are needed here, such as a formalized notation system that can be applied to a wide variety of works. Examples of more complex parameters are: - Input and output of the interaction. How to capture the (type of) input by a user into a system, and the output that is generated by this? Often both input and output are dynamic, non-linear entities that can take many forms of action (typing, video, physiological processes...). - Direction of the communication: one-to-one, one-to-one-to-many etc. (+ onedirectional, two way, recursive). Many options are possible here. V2_Organisation Capturing Unstable Media 20

21 - Precise description of the user's actions in some cases, only specific actions or commands produce the desirable result (e.g. in specially designed user interfaces). For now, we recommend that user interaction should be described both formally, in a model such as the one described above, and through well-chosen documentation. For recommendations on documentation strategies, see Deliverable 1.2. V2_Organisation Capturing Unstable Media 21

22 Appendix 1 Object and relation types in V2_Archive's object-relation model Object types Address Artefact Audio Audio_Digital CDRom (sic) Class Context Event Film Image Image_Digital Installation Language Link Location Notion Organisation Person Price Project Property Publication Telephone Text Time Video Video_Digital Relations Between different object types: - Created by / Created - Has participant / Participant of - Described by / Is about - Comprises / Part of - Is / Adjective of - Timed at / Time of - Located at / Location of - Telephone / Telephone of - In language / Language of - Costs / Price of - Specifications / Specifications of - Derived from / Derivative Between similar object types: - Also called - Translation of / Translated to Notion-relations: - Use / Use for - Narrower term / Broader term - Related term - Triggers - Synonym - Antonym Class-relations: - Subclass of / Superclass of - Triggers - Synonym - Antonym V2_Organisation Capturing Unstable Media 22

23 Appendix 2 Report of visit to Daniel Langlois Foundation, Montreal Wednesday 4 - Friday 6 June 2003 Sandra 'fokky' Fauconnier About the Daniel Langlois Foundation (from its website): "The Daniel Langlois Foundation for Art, Science, and Technology is a private, non-profit organization that Mr. Langlois created in Its aim is to further knowledge of the arts and sciences by combining the two with the help of technology. The Foundation also hopes to foster critical thinking about how technology affects our society, surroundings and culture. In addition, the Foundation encourages the exploration of the aesthetics specific to our technological environments. Through its Centre for Research and Documentation, the Foundation aims to make available to the public information and documentation about the history of, and contemporary practices in, electronic and digital media arts. " The Daniel Langlois Foundation is funding V2_'s research project "Capturing Unstable Media" which deals with the documentation aspects of the preservation of electronic art. Furthermore, the Foundation is working together with V2_ as a partner in this project, more precisely in the specific deliverables about preservation (the Daniel Langlois Foundation is a co-initiator of the Variable Media Initiative) and about metadata (especially thesauri). For more information about "Capturing Unstable Media": Variable Media Initiative: During a three-day visit to the Foundation, we exchanged information about archives and metadata research, user interfaces and specific archive projects and research. I had meetings with the following people: Jean Gagnon, Executive Director of the Foundation jgagnon@fondation-langlois.org Alain Depocas, Director of the Centre for Research and Documentation (CR+D) adepocas@fondation-langlois.org Vincent Bonin, archivist/researcher working on the Vasulka archives vbonin@fondationlanglois.org Mona Jimenez, researcher in residence, working on an "artist instrumentation database" with case studies related to the Vasulkas' work mona@materia.com The following meetings and demonstrations took place (in non-chronological order): Meeting with Jean Gagnon and Alain Depocas (Thursday), where we discussed the general progress of the research project. At this moment, V2_ has almost finished Deliverable 1.1 (inventory of related collections and initiatives on the preservation of media art) and is working on Deliverable 1.2 (preservation issues / case studies) and 1.3 (metadata issues). We went through the deliverable texts that I sent to the Foundation earlier, and had general discussion on V2_Organisation Capturing Unstable Media 23