Dont Make me Think – Steve Krug
Mental Models – Indi Young
Designing Interfaces – Jennifer Tidwell

Metadata and Taxonomy books

Building Enterprise Taxonomies – Daren L. Stewart
The Accidental Taxonomist – Heather Hedden
Metadata Solutions: Using Metamodels – Adrienne Tannenbaum

Digital Asset Management - David Austerberry
The DAM Book – Peter Krogh

Its a no frills, no promotional sales language, vendor agnostic, approach to just getting to the basics of the technologies on offer. The focus of the list is on the technology aspects of the products as opposed to the features or strengths. Currently, the document has 70+ collaborators including myself (and we are adding more every day). Please contact me if you like to be added to the list of collaborators or visit the link and request access here.

Below is a list of each column featured on the DAM List:

• Vendor
• URL
• Products Offered
• Proprietary or Open Source
• Solutions Offered: Installed, Hosted, SaaS
• Technical Specs: Server (Database)
• Technical Specs: Server (APP/Webserver)
• Technical Specs: Code Base (back-end)
• Technical Specs: Code Base (UI)
• Technical Specs: OS (Server)
• Technical Specs: OS (Client)
• Technical Specs: API (Software)
• Technical Specs: API (Webservice)
• Technical Specs: Search Engine
• Metadata Handling: XMP
• Who’s Using it: non-profits, museums and organizations
• Who’s Using It: corporate and for-profit enterprises

Let’s take Greene and Meissners message and apply it to the digital realm. Working in the digital realm requires the ability to make judicious decisions regarding what to keep, how to keep it and where to keep it. You have to have the ability to say “no” and understand that you can’t keep everything. That folder, filing cabinet and even the human to file it cost a whole lot less than software, databases, servers and technical support. You also cannot keep digital materials in the same exhaustive manner as you might have with analog material. If you have spent most of your career managing analog materials this is a difficult philosophical shift to make, even impossible for some. However, its a shift that is necessary to work in today’s technology driven environment, if you plan on managing digital materials with any success.

Digital Asset Managers understand that every digital asset we choose comes with a cost (resources it will take to manage, upkeep, file formats, migrations etc), therefore we are extremely judicious with both what we keep (the assets) and how we keep it (the metadata). We have to say “no” when something is just outside the scope of the collection or would involve to much manual metadata entry. Whenever possibly we side with automation as opposed to human processing or cataloging. For example a system that required every time an asset was used a job number to be entered into a metadata field is just not scalable over time. A more sensible approach would be that the ordering system and the DAM talked to one another and populated that field automatically. If that wasn’t possible then the digital asset manager might choose to only record the first order number associated with the asset.

In general digital asset managers think holistically and try to understand things on a iterative level. We understand that adopting a particular standard for applying information to assets can have vast repercussions down the line and nothing is ever permanent as technology changes yesterday. We have to choose our methods very wisely and use the word, “no” more often than we would like. Anytime I come across a complex worfklow or best practice, I know “analog” thinking is to blame and people were not thinking holistically. Siloed analog approaches just don’t work in the digital realm, they don’t leverage the efficiencies of technology and they don’t take into account exactly how much content is being created every day and what it’s going to take to mange that glut of information.

Digital Asset Managers understand how to leverage data across disparate databases, rather than the old analog method of using repetition and making copies (silos) to keep information together and create relationships (i.e. the carbon copy). The result of analog-ist thinking will often lead to an unfathomable amount of backlog and digital paperwork, because the workflow/standard they created would only be achievable if you had an army at your disposal. To me this poor judgment is not “job security”, as I’ve heard far too often, its analog-ist insecurity. These types of judgment calls are the result of not understanding at the conceptual core, what technology allows us to do and what it requires in return.

To describe how managing digital information differs from the analog world. I often use my Greek Vase analogy. Let’s say you have a Greek Vase, an actual physical 3-D object, this vase is not going to replicate itself right before your eyes hundreds of times, that digital file on the other hand, will do it in a heartbeat. Therefore working with digital resources requires a completely different shift in thinking and practices that worked great for managing analog materials, just won’t scale when moved to the digital realm.

It’s about focusing on retaining what’s really, really, important and the most appropriate place for those resources. For example, objects should go in a collections management system (glass and film negatives are objects too), and digital assets should be managed in a DAM. Both can have different metadata schemas, but they might also share some common elements (Title, description, keywords etc). You don’t have to repeat content or information in both systems, you can just have the systems talk to one another. You can focus on master assets in the DAM and original objects in the collections management system. You also don’t need to create/upload thumbnails or web-ready assets in your DAM as it should create them automatically. In an analog world this was not possible, if you wanted a smaller copy of something you had to physically make it and then save that as you didn’t want to have to make that same thing manually every single time.

If you don’t think about scalability when choosing what to digital assets to keep, the management of those resources over time, formatting, migrations etc. you will quickly end up with more process and less product over time. In the end it really comes down to quantity and resources, like with the Greek Vase analogy. You may only ever have the one object, but over time you will have many surrogate digital representations of that object. You cannot think about managing digital files the same way you did with analog materials, there is just too much of it. In an ideal world we would have lots and lots of everything and lots and lots of information about everything, but that’s unrealistic and unless you have the manpower of Google to process all of it, it’s just not going to happen. Therefore you must be judicious in the execution of your scope, use the right tools for the job, think holistically and don’t over complicate.

Many institutions who have systems that were implemented over 4 years ago are now facing the challenges of an over-accumulation of content, poorly defined DAM scopes and ones that are no longer meeting the needs of the staff. First and foremost DAM systems should be a means to efficiently and effectively transmit ‘valuable’ and high-use assets throughout an organization. Some of these complications arose out of the transition from analog to digital with no change in staffing. Old staff were just ‘transitioned’ into working in the digital realm without any real training or professional development requirements. The skills used in managing analog materials were not the same as those necessary for the effective management and creation of digital materials. Analog workflows do not cleanly transition into digital ones, nor should they, there are better ways of doing things now. So many institutions had to ‘make-do’ as there were no other options that didn’t involve sweeping the human resource slate clean and starting over again.

Digital asset management is not just the system (i.e The DAM), but a combination of content management related professional disciplines. These disciplines include, but are not limited to: business management, information architecture, library and information science, software engineering/development, content creation and publications development. So who or what are these most integral roles at the bare minimum of the resource chain to make a DAM project successful? What follows is a summary of 4 essential DAM roles, some of which originate from the epic work The Content Management Bible by Bob Boiko. However, many folks will never get around to reading this most essential work, so I’ve made it easier for you. If you don’t have at least these three roles present in a dedicated DAM team, you’re not doing it right.

Business Analyst:
They need to fully understand the discipline, concepts and execution of digital asset management. They are the business representative for the digital asset management project to the rest of the organization and the outside world. They understand how digital asset management fits into the overall strategy of the institution. The business analyst will negotiate support and cooperation from the institution in regard to digital asset management initiatives on behalf of the DAM team. They perform business analytics on all processes and workflows that are effected by digital asset management. They will then help the team to apply these analytics to the creation of new processes and workflows to meet organizational needs.

Content Analyst:
They need to gather content requirements and determine the value of assets to be managed in the DAM. They create standardization documentation for polices surrounding the cataloging and management of rich media assets. Design the framework for the architecture of the information (metadata schemas, folder architecture). They will need to establish a asset lifecycle schedule from the birth or creation of digital assets to their retirement. They will need to have a strong background in cataloging and standardization skills. The content analyst determines project plans for the ingestion of new rich media into the DAM system, workflows and surrounding processes. In leaner times the content analyst also performs the role of a content metator for the DAM (digital librarian). This entails the review of incoming assets to make sure they adhere to written standards, add metadata where needed, perform training in all aspects of DAM (end-user to admistrator). Information Science professionals are often ideal candidates as content analysts, however not all library science professionals are good fits for the role. The library and information science professional should be well rounded and come from various environments (for-profit and not-for-profit), have experience in working with digital creative agencies and in more traditional archives.

Rights & Usage Analyst:
The focus of digital asset management is on the distribution of valuable assets both within and outside the organization. The rights and usage expert will evaluate the the organizations rights and usage approach and workflow. They will streamline the distribution process of assets both within and outside the organization, standardize the rights associated with assets, and increase the amount of assets available for use. They will work closely with the Digital Asset Manager/content Analyst to asses the collection based on rights and usage. They will have advanced experience with creative commons, PLUS and other rights management initiatives, workflows and tools.

Programmer/Developer:
This person will implement necessary changes, enhancements and extensions to the digital asset management system or chose the development environment for new DAM projects. They are able to automate acquisition routines, create and run system diagnostics and provide system intelligence to the DAM team. They have expertise in database and XML technologies. They need to be a SQL ninja as some DAM systems do not provide an easy front-end for doing analytics.

Along with these four roles you may have some borrowed talent such as a administrators, project managers, usability/user-experience professionals, production mangers or even a CIO. Some of the roles above may even overlap into a general Digital Asset Manager role depending on the project. In the short run if you do not have at least these 4 professional roles (this does not mean you can lump them all into one person), your DAM might survive, but its success over time depends with the inclusion of these individual professionals in your project budget. If you want more on this topic as I have really glazed over what takes many pages to describe into a few short paragraphs please read The Content Management Bible by Bob Boiko, specifically chapters 12-14 and 33. In short, Digital Asset Management is too big to saddle on the shoulders of any one person and requires at minimum a team of 4 dedicated, experienced professionals to be effective.

I think about 90% of those working with cultural institution collections don’t really understand the difference between a digital asset management system (DAM) and a collections management system or even what a content management system is (CMS). Take a look at this chart to understand just how much I am going to simplify the very complex topic of content technologies for your reading enjoyment. I also believe there are people out there that can explain it a lot better than me, but no one really has (yet) in any succinct, oversimplified and layman way. So here I go jumping off into what is really a super, messy, overlapping sea of applications that make up only part of content technologies. I’m going to focus on the difference between a digital asset management system (DAM) and a collections management system, I’ve thrown in content management (CMS), specifically web CMS for good measure. Anytime you try to wrap something up in a tiny package, you are bound to overgeneralize. However, I think the risk of over generalization is worth the price in the hopes that out there to get an inkling of an idea about what makes these systems different. You may also realize after reading this, that what you thought you needed might not be really what you need. You may also realize there are some serious gray areas and some systems overlap in scope and try to be all things to all people. Also, remember content technologies are applications that help you mange information, however if you do not also put the business practices and workflows around those applications to make them successful all you will be managing (or not) is your bottom line. At the end of the day content management is not just installing an application, its something that changes the business practices and workflows of the entire organization for the better (albeit a very painful change to some). Now to the “what’s the big diff?” part of this.

I will first try to explain the difference by using a stimulating example…

Idealized, fantasy-land, super simplified museum example:
For each object you have the object itself and any number of digital representations attached to that object. The Collections Management System (TMS, CollectiveACCESS, eMU) manages information about the “object” and associated metadata (CCO, CDWA, VRA). All of the images that depict this awesome object are stored in the DAM system which gets its own little set of metadata (Dublin Core, XMP/IPTC). This metadata however relates to the digital representation of the object and should be much more minimal than what you are storing in the collections management system. Some of this metadata is shared between both the collections management system and the DAM, but not all of it is in both. Each system has their own specific types of metadata. This sharing can even include the collections management system linking to the images in the DAM and not just data and vice versa (data to the images). Then you have the museum website, which stores all the website content in the content management system (CMS). Drupal is an example of a web CMS*. The CMS system is the back-end to the website it keeps all our information nice and tidy and enable a non-tech savvy person to create and edit content, manage users etc. It also manages the navigation, webpages, content (among lots of other things). For example to display the museum collections online Drupal “talks” to both the DAM (where it gets the object images) and the collections management system (for object data) and displays them online in a very pleasing manner (again, ideally). Through APIs all these disparate systems talk to one another delivering content where needed/requested.

*The CMS system type referenced above is a web focused CMSs – there are other kinds such as enterprise cms systems which focus on documents, details, and records related to the organizational processes of an enterprise. Get it?

Now for the breakdown…

DAM:
Digital asset management is all about the digital. The focus here is on access and retrieval. These systems fit well into busy production environments. The DAM system in a museum for example, would contain both object images as well as administrative images (museum interiors, gallery shots) as well as merchandising assets (product imagery, catalog layouts .indd files). Just in the type of content stored, you see how the DAM differs from a collections management system. The DAM is a hub for all the creatives (designers, photographers) to get to their assets, move them around and work with them. Its a dissemination platform, it gets that file from point A to point B quickly. It’s also the system that is the source for images delivered to the web. The DAM creates a centralized area for users to access assets. The assets that go into the DAM should be assets where the amount of resources required in managing them is equal to the need/demand for them. When low on resources, the assets that make their way into your DAM, should be your Rock Stars. These assets should be ones that are output agonostic (print, web) and the most flexible medium. Sometimes workflow systems are built upon DAM systems, enabling enterprises/institutions to fulfill requests for images in scenarios where the requestee does not have access. This can also include workflow systems that come from the content creators (photography studios and graphic designers) enabling them to get assets into the system efficiently and in a consistent way.

CMS
CMS covers a lot of territory so we going to speak in terms of a web CMS. A web CMS, enables the management of different types of web content. It basically helps users with no technical knowledge to easily create and edit content that is delivered onto the web. Examples of popular web CMS systems include: Drupal, Joomla and WordPress. Wikipedia explains it pretty succinctly here, so I’m not going to waste too much space on it. Now, Enterprise CMS is a bit different. Again, Wikipedia does a good job at explaining that as well here.
There is a world of CMS systems to navigate through, its pretty impossible to be an expert in them all.

Collections Management Systems:
As stated above, the Collections Management System (TMS, CollectiveACCESS, eMU) manages information about the “object” and associated metadata (CCO, CDWA, VRA). Interestingly enough, even Wikipedia doesn’t want to touch this application type by providing us with a nice definition. Objects/artifacts can be anything tangible 3D, 2D or born digital objects(!). Notice the different use of the words “object” and “assets”. When we talk collections management we are talking about “objects”. When we talk about DAM we are talking about “assets”. You would store information about objects in a collections management system when you need to record information about the original object itself such as: provenance, bibliographic references, constituents and conservation information. Basically, lots of complex and extensive data about an object goes into a collections management system and a DAM is where you place information specific to a digital asset. Hopefully, you are starting to understand that a collections management system is really good at storing text based information about “objects”. Now, sometimes you can *use* a DAM as a collections management system. However, I will warn you that this really just muddles the waters between information about the digital asset and object information. This is explained in more detail in the next section.

DAMs and Collections Management Systems:
Why even separate the two, you might ask? Well, in the case where you have extensive amounts object information (i.e museums/archives). You do not want to store this same information with every single instance of the digital asset and vice-versa. Mainly because that digital asset itself has all kinds of its own metadata (technical and administrative) associated with it such as: how the digital image was captured, who did the capturing, usage parameters, rights etc. Digital assets also have life-cycles and a DAM makes this process more efficient. You can setup triggers to retire certain images when usage rights run out or when an asset has ceased from popular use. Information about the digital asset is specific to the asset. So in short, you want one container to manage everything about the object. While you use the other (DAM) to keep track of all the digital representations and their complicated life-cycles.

What about “Born-Digital” for cultural instituions?
Yes, things can get even more complicated. In other industries most of your content is “born-digital” (advertising design, web design etc) as these materials began as digital files. For cultural institutions however, born digital is where it gets interesting/complicated (warning: gray area). The “object” information approach can apply to born digital items when you need to store more information about the item that would be outside the scope of a DAM or when it would require the replication of too much data associated with each individual object. In other words you could treat the born-digital like an “object”. I would use the DAM to manage the original digital file without trying to duplicate to much “object” specific information, as that’s the duty of the collections management system. Just enough to make it findable in the DAM. All this while trying to keep the types of information/metadata stored specific to the application solution. Metadata about the born-digital object itself in the collections management system and asset specific metadata in the DAM (where it belongs). Sometimes if your a purely digital archive/collection, you might be able to skip the collections management solution, provided your not going to wind up with 400 metadata fields attached to one asset with lots of duplication of the same information across namespaces.

In reality, there are a ton of gray areas and endless ways to marry these systems together and some systems even overlap. This is hard, complex stuff and people spend a lot of time trying to figure it all out. Consultants get paid lots of money to provide solutions to all complexities involved with collections/content management. Its hard to wrap-it up in a tiny nutshell without going off on a tangent about one particular aspect or changing my mind all together in the middle of the thought (post). The important part is understanding what your REAL needs are and which system will allow you meet these needs in the most pragmatic, efficient, cost-effective way possible.

Here’s some more where that came from:

DAM vs. WCM – do you really understand the difference?
DAM Talk: Scott Seebass CEO Xinet Webnative DAM
What’s the DAM Difference?: Content Management’s Best Tool is Digital Asset Management

I recently had a colleague return from an Archives Conference abroad that focused on Digital Asset Management and to put it lightly her mind was blown. She’s not an archivist, she’s not a digital asset manager, but she is an administrative assistant in a cultural institution. Her reactions to what she learned further confirmed some of my own feelings I had after recently speaking at both a Digital Asset Management conference and an Archives conference. Which is that, technology has changed our work environments and roles more than most people are aware. It is no longer acceptable to operate in a silo and remain unaware of how other professions cross-over into your own. You might be saying “that’s great, but what do you mean by this?”.

One of the best examples is that Digital Asset Management, which is a product of the “corporate” world, now exists within libraries, archives and museums. However, many people involved in those projects at those institutions are unaware of the existence of the profession of digital asset managers or the world of digital asset management. From the start they are cut off from both those networks and the resources available to those working in the field of DAM. So, they are forced to reinvent the wheel when it comes to DAM within their institution and tend to only source other “like” institutions for help cause that’s all they know.

Also, many corporate digital asset managers and their years of experience do not work for cultural institutions. Therefore, the person who ends up being the digital asset manager, for all intents and purposes, at the institution is not trained in that profession. Yet they are being asked to take on that role as well as its responsibilities They then begin to apply their analog collections management practices to a digital process that already has rules and standards and often times do not understand the repercussions of certain decisions. This causes the inexperienced to use applications outside of their intended purpose and warp the scope of what certain applications are meant to do, creating a bastardized implementation. These types of technology implementations will never solve the problems they were intended to, because the products have been implemented outside their scope.

When I gave my talk to the New York Archives Conference, I spoke about interface design. Crazy topic to bring to a forum where most people don’t even think about design or just thought I was giving a talk on “websites”. However, it was relevant. The people in that room are the same people that are being tasked with choosing a digital asset management system and even designing the “look and feel” of websites used to expose their digital collections to the world. Yet, some of them don’t even know basic design heuristics or that such a thing even exists. Not to mention there is a whole profession of people out there doing usability and interface design specifically for information retrieval applications. They don’t understand the differences between applications, websites, software, webapps etc. They also miss the mark on understanding searching and how the semantic web plays an integral role in how they should structure information. There are fundamental concepts here that cannot be ignored.

These less savvy folks, working in their professional silos, are then forced to approach a project with little to no training and absolutely no scope on how giant of a task they are actually being asked to do. Sure, you can stay up to date and read blogs, but not having the years of experience that digital media and digital asset management professionals have behind in order to successfully execute those types of projects is a VERY tall order. Bravo to those that do it well, but have you visited a Library or archives website lately? There are so few elegantly executed ones to pick from. Aren’t librarians and archivists supposed to be information retrieval/representation professionals? It’s shocking how so many miss the mark completely. Blaming it on available resources is a cop-out. It’s the result of not staffing your institution appropriately and recognizing when some roles cease to be relevant, then making those hard decisions. Luckily, for some folks CMS systems came along (WordPress, Drupal etc) and some brave souls (probably operating alone and against much resistance) rescued their institutions websites from the world of geocitites-esque design and architecture.

Library Science Education isn’t doing much to lessen this professional divide. So often I’ve seen curriculum trapped in the “working in a library” scenario, when that barely even scrapes the surface at what Information Science covers and the applications of Library Science to the outside world. One exciting development is the addition of digital asset management and interface design courses to Library Science programs. However, this is not enough. Unless the christened “digital asset manager” sees beyond the professional silos the project will undoubtedly fail due to implementation issues and poorly specked out scopes. Harsh yes, but realistic.

One thing that will help them get there is EDUCATION. I can’t stress this enough. Education is needed in order to help people understand technology and its touch points within their professional realm and where those touch point cross over into other professions. Without this “awareness” the wrong solution will be implemented to solve a particular need. This is dangerous, as once something is implemented it is very hard to turn back the clock and do it properly.

Another repercussion to being unaware is this. Folks, the implementation of technology is not an opportunity to mirror that analog workflow or analog collections structure and replace it with an exact digital copy. You have to entirely revisit your workflows and collections and determine the new way to implement and represent them. “Going digital” isn’t just an intensive scanning project with some metadata in a database thrown in. “Going digital” requires an entire shift in thinking and a complete overhaul of institutional processes. There is no digital “paperclip” holding those relevant materials together. Nor do you need one, there are better tools for that now. Don’t approach your digital projects thinking its just a representation of the analog. Don’t implement technology just for the sake of doing so. You must have a really clear strategy and understand the relationship between the information and its digital representations as well as your users in order to execute a project well.

“Going digital” also requires a shift in business process and professional roles. You need to hire different people with skills sets you’ve never worked with before (professional photographers, digital technicians, usability and design people). Your programmer is not a designer, please don’t make him/her do it. Don’t ask your 20 year veteran archivist, to now completely shift and become a “digital archivist”. It just won’t work, they don’t have the time to catch up. That period is over. They may have vast institutional knowledge, but that does not make them the right fit for taking on a role that requires specific technical skill sets. Leverage this person in other ways, but don’t expect them to deliver you great digital content. The professionals that have resided in libraries, archives, cultural collections for years, now have completely different demands placed upon them and need to be able to perform tasks involving technology effectively, not just adequately. Last time I checked, the responsibility of the institution is not to create an oasis of job security, but deliver content to the public and their constituents. Otherwise, the burden is placed on that one lone staffer who “gets it” (if they even exist) to solve all the institutions digital woes.

The realm of Digital Asset Management is starting to look toward Library and Information Science for help (metadata/taxonomies being one of those areas), but Library Science is not looking enough to Digital Asset Management or any other professions for that matter (Usability, Design, Business Analytics, Information Architecture). What gets me is, many cultural collections are far more complicated to scope and manage than any corporate asset management project! The tools that librarians and archivists are now using are the tools that have been developed and in use for some time in other professions. Want to know who uses Digital Media well? Advertising/Marketing folks! Dearest Librarians, why not ask someone in advertising and marketing about “Tweeting” and what it can do for your institution? They know better than anyone else. I would caution taking advice from anyone about how to use social media (please stop calling it “web 2.0″, it’s beyond that now) who isn’t in touch with or came from those worlds.

Library Science as a profession has outgrown its original scope some time ago and its time we start catching up. Unfortunately, that’s easier said than done as there is a chasm of knowledge separating those in-the-know from those that are not. If you are working outside your scope, save time and just admit it. Give yourself the opportunity to learn, and concentrate on what you’re good at. Then hire someone to fill in the knowledge gaps, the reality is that it might require letting go of someone else. Technology costs real money, therefore every seat must be filled with skilled professionals or you are losing money. Spending money without accountability is irresponsible. Furthermore, give that skilled hire the freedom they need to do their job. Trust them and give your talent the space they need to make things great, not just good. Finally, my best advice, reach outside the walls of your profession and see the common threads that tie all of us together. You will find that thread looks remarkably familiar.

In order to really see something clearly you have to get rid of all the crud thats surrounding it. I (others included) call this simple method “getting rid of the R.O.T”.

Nothing is worse than finding the same digital asset in over a zillion places in one system, it devalues the original and is a headache to seek out and destroy all existing versions. For the next point, nothing makes information more irrelevant that when it is outdated. Outdated information can not be leveraged nor can you receive any ROI on it being available, the best thing to do is just get rid of it! Trivial content is just that, it’s trivial and unnecessary. For example if you have a system that can generate a particular file type on demand, let’s say it’s one that can generate a JPG from any type of supplied file be it a TIFF or a PSD or whatever you throw at it. Is it necessary to then also keep copies of JPGs versions of everything in your system as a “just in case”? Nope, no way! Get rid of it.

So, for every asset that makes its way across you desk you need to ask yourself, “is this R.O.T?” You will find that if you start approaching all your projects with “getting rid of the ROT” in your mind, you will start to clear away the cobwebs weighing down your system and overall make it more usable (and your life a bit easier) in the end.

Date: Monday, November 10th, 2008
Time: 12:00 PM – 4:00 PM
Place: NYU Kimmel Center
60 Washington Square South, Room 405, New York, NY 10012

You can find resources to my presentation posted below including my keynote deck as a PDF here which includes my offbeat speech notes. I will say that its probably not fascinating reading compared to actually attending one of my talks. My deck style is a bit unconventional, it’s heavy on imagery and short on text. I am a big fan of Edward Tufte and I take his minimal stance when it comes to creating PowerPoint presentations. In fact I even prefer Keynote over PowerPoint all together.

Here is a list of some of my go-to resources:

Metadata Working Group, boxesandarrows, AIIM: Infonomics Magazine, AIIM: Blog, KMWorld, 37 Signals: Signal vs. Noise Weblog, Digital Curation Center: Tools, XMP Open: The Idea Exchange, Adobe XMP, Adobe XMP: Developers Center, ReadWriteWeb

…for more links please follow me on Del.icio.us

Hope you enjoyed the presentation and feel free to send me any questions you may have.