Changes

- The idea here is to describe your idea in such a way to get as many monkeys to help out with your idea as possible. And a really cool acronym is (almost) mandatory. URLs are good as are git repos, google groups, etc.

I don't know if this would appeal to other attendees, but, as a Solr/

[1] http://www.oclc.org/developer/videos/worldcat-identities-and-terminology-services-vufind

I (@tingletech) have been playing with django on google app engine, trying to put together something better than a spreadsheet for an A/V digitization and preservation project. It is based on PB Core. I could show people how to check out the code and get it running locally on app engine.

* http://www.pbcore.org/PBCore/UserGuide.html

I (@tingletech) have been playing with loading the social graph from SNAC into a graph processing stack.

Other libraries?

Create a simple Statistics Microservice (perhaps several different statistical microservices) that will keep track of a variety of object-level statistical data such as audits, file types, usage, search terms, relationships, events, growth, etc. Should be able to be output as CSV (or pipe or whatev) so it can easily be imported into popular spreadsheet and database software for visualization and reporting.

Downloading and analyzing in Excel is good. But I'd also be interested in what we can do with Javascript graphing/visualization tools.

As part of my [http://code4lib.org/conference/2011/Matienzo code4lib presentation] I may demo some code that works with Digital Forensics XML and gets it into a Solr index. I've successfully thrown Blacklight on top of it, but want to extend it further, especially in terms of figuring what I can do with it and creating a straightforward UI that will represent directory hierarchies.

* https://github.com/anarchivist/gumshoe

A tool for a curator to determine whether the various fields of a metadata record are correct. Takes a metadata record, locates any identifiers (e.g., DOI, PMID). Retrieves a copy of the metadata record from an authoritative source (e.g., CrossRef, PubMed). Displays a human-readable page that compares fields in the initial record with fields in the authoritative record. Each field is color-coded based on how well it matches, so the curator can quickly identify discrepancies.

[[Category:Code4Lib2011]]