Name:
DEIA & NISO Standards
Description:
DEIA & NISO Standards
Thumbnail URL:
https://cadmoremediastorage.blob.core.windows.net/7d3e7ef6-0b1a-4513-b2ae-8a74f63b469e/videoscrubberimages/Scrubber_1.jpg
Duration:
T00H48M41S
Embed URL:
https://stream.cadmore.media/player/7d3e7ef6-0b1a-4513-b2ae-8a74f63b469e
Content URL:
https://cadmoreoriginalmedia.blob.core.windows.net/7d3e7ef6-0b1a-4513-b2ae-8a74f63b469e/DEIA NISO Standards.mp4?sv=2019-02-02&sr=c&sig=SV4e%2Bnbhe9hT7ffLltAeR7Kyi4CLxf9KG7RsVCSj7tg%3D&st=2024-10-25T18%3A48%3A29Z&se=2024-10-25T20%3A53%3A29Z&sp=r
Upload Date:
2024-03-06T00:00:00.0000000
Transcript:
Language: EN.
Segment:0 .
There's Tom. We've got Tom. We've got Marilyn. We've got Campbell. We've got Rachel. So we've got everybody. Guess we can go ahead and start. So I'm Angie Ekeler again. I'm the moderator for the session.
I'm happy to facilitate the conversation, but all of the presenters are here as well. So I want them to all feel free to drive the conversation as much as they wish. And actually, our big desire is for this to be an audience driven conversation. And so we really hope that you will type things in the chat, type things in the Q&A and really let us know your thoughts.
First, I think I'd like to share my screen, if I can, so we can look at the survey results. Do you not have that power? I think. Let me see. I might have it there. Can you see it? Yes OK, great. So this was our first survey, just letting us know where everybody's joining us from.
And it's actually quite interesting that we're all in the us, Canada and it looks like the British Isles. So any thoughts on this? Thank you to our European UK colleagues for sticking in. It must be about almost 738. It is important to remember this is not everyone who will be watching the session, but the people who are watching it live and able to respond to our survey.
All right. And then our second question was how comfortable are you your own comfort level with the AIA discussions? And it looks like we've got a majority of people who are completely comfortable, which is great. And then about a third of us are comfortable, but a bit lost. So may be seeking directions, seeking resources, seeking ideas.
And then 5% very honest. 5% of people who admit to being a bit uneasy. And luckily for us, no one is completely uncomfortable. So that's good. Third little temperature taking survey here. In your opinion, what's your organization's comfort level? And we've got a split. Oh, it's changing. It's changing while we're looking at it.
Very comfortable. A little bit more that are very comfortable. Comfortable, but a bit lost, about 37% and a bit uneasy about 16% So maybe it's a good time to just kind of ask if anyone in the audience has anything more to add. If the survey questions, if you have anything else to add to your answer or if you have thoughts on the results.
And I don't think those results are super surprising. I think any time we've done surveys like this in the past, we find that the folks who attend these sessions are a bit of a self-selecting group. And so perhaps our individual comfort level is higher. And certainly I think we all wish our organizations were doing more, but perhaps they're lagging a little bit behind and we're sometimes dragging them kicking and screaming.
Thanks so Camille asked a relevant question. And I will respond so that everyone is aware who may or may not be reading the chat. The session is being recorded. It is available to the registrants of the meeting. It's not public outside of the registrants, so it won't be published.
Publicly published. So that's just as enough. Why? because we have so many ongoing sessions. Not everyone can participate in every session, but we are recording them for the participants. And just for everyone's information, if you feel uncomfortable speaking out in this kind of session, we also have a Google Doc. You can write suggestions on anonymously, and I think that link was shared in the chat for the presentation.
I don't know if we shared it again here, but there's also I'm going to send. Also a link to a survey that's going to ask if you're interested in getting involved. So you can actually share your name anonymously if you would like to get involved in any of the working groups. Perhaps start a new working group.
How I see you popping in with your video. Hi Hi. I'm Paula Krebs from the Modern Language Association. And and I just wanted to share a recent experience we've had with the EDI stuff, and that is we convened not an ad hoc committee on anti-racism to try to examine our policies and procedures at the Association and figure out where we could be actively anti-racist and not be racist.
And it became apparent to the committee and to the staff that the committee couldn't do that work, that that was to. Specialized and then too important to ask a volunteer committee to do. And so we and people do this for a living, right? So we hired a consultant now to give us the information that we need to do that kind of equity, audit procedures and governance and stuff that would help a committee on anti-racism know what next steps to take.
So I wondered if what other people's experience was of not overburdening volunteers, especially volunteers of color who want to work on these issues or who understand that the organizations need work on these issues, like what's right for professionals to do what's right for volunteers to do. And and I guess where you see your own work fitting in that volunteer versus professional spectrum, I'll stop there.
That's great. Thank you. Responses Todd, correct me if I'm wrong, I think most of the work at an ISO is done by volunteers in terms of the committees. Yes, that's true. We do have a staff person responsible. That's Kimberly Graham.
She's a Dea advocate. I think she is in a different session right now. But primarily we empower the volunteers to lead this work. In some ways it's sort of the opposite of your perspective, which I don't question or I thoroughly accept. From our perspective, we wanted the community to lead our how do we respond to certain things?
Tell us what we should be doing. We led our Dea activities from a. We would like the community to tell us what to do rather than to presume that we know what to do. And we started this entire process with a community outreach activity, which was what is wrong?
How can we help? Tell us what to do and. Engage the community in that way rather than, you know, the NISO staff knows what's wrong here because, you know, that is manifestly not true, because if we knew what was wrong, we probably would have fixed it earlier. So, you know, that has been our approach. Yeah and I just want to clarify that we absolutely our volunteers will be telling us what to do and making recommendations.
That's absolutely not staff and not consultant driven, but to get them the information that they needed, they found they couldn't elicit it. They didn't know how to read the documents or what documents to read. They didn't know how to prepare the survey that needed, you know. So it was kind of an interesting process whereby they said, we just don't feel like we're getting everything we need.
We need some help getting the information. So this is just kind of slightly different, but I think absolutely consistent with you with the values that you're articulating. Time yeah, I would throw that to the committee, the members of the people on the nisa committee who are here and you know, do they do they feel like they have what they need? It seems that they're from my perspective, it seems like they're very good at asking the community for help in what they need and asking us to support them.
But to be honest, if they need more, if there's other things that they need, I would love to hear from them. There here or privately. Yeah I don't really want to step out of turn about the committee, but I do think that this is generally the case when it comes to equity, diversity, inclusion and accessibility.
Is that many people in the community that are no one or self-identified or often really overwhelmed with the number of volunteer opportunities that are out there. And it's an honor to be asked, but to try to be able to do all of them is very detrimental to anyone. And I think this is part of the problem generally when it comes to equity, diversity and inclusion is that much of this work is if you get a consultant, you're paying them to do it.
And so part of it is, is that you really need to create positions within your organizations that are paid positions to be able to do this work, rather than asking the same marginalized communities that are already carrying the heavy burden when it comes to work on this area and to creating relationships to do that free work. And I think it's very problematic to be able to do that.
And oftentimes, even though many of us and I can speak for myself as an indigenous woman, that we're honored to be asked and we're enthusiastic about the work. But the amount of work is overwhelming and it really shouldn't be indigenous people that carry that the, the, do the heavy lifting on the burden of reconciliation. Scott So we talk about it a lot in Canada, but in other countries as well, and pertaining to other areas of marginalized communities, it's basically the same people over and over again that are doing that work off the side of their plate.
And it does detrimentally affect both their health, their work life balance because of the work life balance and also to their community and their position within that community. So I do think that it's important to actually pay consultants to do some of this work and to be able to work with them in a good way. And I've been part of other conversations where it has been where you got to take an role because we don't often get the time off of our regular jobs to do this work.
This is an additional work that we take on, and I think we all do volunteer work. But the amount of volunteer work that individuals of marginalized communities coming from diversity, diverse communities, marginalized communities, the accessibility we're always asked over and over again to do this work for free. And I don't know if that's appropriate. And that is a specific to nice.
So that's kind generally throughout this thing. So it isn't about specifically this committee, but I do think it's important that it does become paid work. I don't ask other people to do their work and their profession for free, and I don't know if they should be doing that with other individuals. So I think other people have their hands up. But that's definitely something I heard over and over again at the joint conference of librarians of color.
Great Thanks. Tom, I think I saw your hand go up first, so I was just going to relate an experience. We had all this kind of similar to this, so we embarked on improving the accessibility of the ORCID registry early last year. And we started by trying to form a group of researchers who had accessibility issues that we could work with, who could give us the feedback we needed, actionable feedback.
We needed to make improvements because we get we get support tickets. I can't use the registry. Right? so we actually have processes for this to help people with accessibility, use issues, use the registry by them. But Ideally what we need to do is make the registry accessible to everyone. So we contacted these people a bit naively, really, and we got a lot of responses saying, why would I do this for free?
Just because I don't know, blind or I have some sort of thing doesn't mean that I want to fix your website for you. You should just fix your website, right? And we got these messages back and we went, oh, yeah, absolutely. And we realized what we'd done wrong, but we didn't know at the first, right? So we did go into it quite naively, but we learned our lesson and we employed an amazing consultancy in Wales, in the UK, the digital accessibility centre, who helped us work through all of the different accessibility issues.
In ORCID. We have some amazing working sessions with these incredible group of people who are not only passionate about making the world better for people with accessibility issues, but they have a wide range of accessibility issues themselves. And you can sit down and talk with people and actually you can empathize with someone when you sit down and you what you watch or you listen to them struggle to use your registry because we haven't done our job properly.
And it was a real catalyst for me and my team, the product team. We just went, OK, this is now at the top of the list of things we need to fix and the changes are going through at the moment. We're hoping to hit wcag accessibility and also more functional accessibility. So one of the things we learned as well is that you can make your website accessibility according to all the tools that automatically check these things.
But people with accessibility issues still can't use your website, right? There's a difference between this sort of checkbox exercise, which makes it technically correct and actually making a usable, usable service. So we learn all sorts of things from that. And that's because we went out and we found some people who are professional but also understand the issues and work with them.
So yeah, I think it's a really good idea and a great approach. Rarely did you add. Merely you're muted first unmute. So Thanks Tom for your vulnerability and that I think that your modeling sharing like oops I did I did this thing and it was like in retrospect, like all the wrong thing.
But I learned something from it, you know, hopefully others will have had those experiences and will also share them with a fair degree of humility, but just also don't do what I did. So I think that the answer to this question really depends on your position ability, and maybe it can be seen as a yes and always be looking for opportunities to hire, pay appropriately, compensate people who are professionals to do work professionally.
But also looking at my, my own position ability, which is having a lot of privilege. I know I project a lot of confidence, but I feel like an imposter at all times working in a die space. I feel like I don't belong here. Like I'm not skilled enough. I don't know enough. I'm just I'm being I'm being very honest, but I feel like it is my responsibility to continue to work in this space and to not shirk away from discomfort, but instead work with it, to listen and to support to the best of my ability.
I'm not a leader within my organization. So, you know, always trying to communicate and manage up, but also realizing that I do have a good deal of authority and privilege within my, you know, within my own work. And so to be able to do this. So, you know, when I was invited to join this group, I felt like, you know, the ISO work, I thought, I'm not qualified to do this. But I said yes, because, you know, I want to support.
And I also volunteered to co-chair with Camille because I didn't want for Camille to be, you know, alone in leading this work. So I just pitch in, you know, however I can and support as an ally and try to shoulder as much of that work that is possible to help move the whole group forward. So I think that taking all of those approaches and not thinking about ways to move the work forward while you engage your consultants is good.
But I think that there's always the temptation to kick the can down the road until we have a Fuller picture. And frankly, those are you know, those are signs and signals of white supremacy and, you know, that you want to have these perfect conditions before you move forward. And on that note, I would encourage folks to attend the session that Camille and I are moderating later on today.
Tools and resources that support Dia, the C4 desk toolkits, I think really clearly outline and address how white supremacy and perfection are really at the root of not making progress in these areas. And finally, I want to in the presentation that we give, I want to really give a shout out to Lauren and Johansson, who in our standards group really took forward that spreadsheet and helped make sense of it.
Those are nice a-plus scholars, and I think that the role of the ISO Plus scholars is really important for all of us who are in these spaces to have the opportunity, the privilege and the opportunity to listen listen to those voices and the perspectives that they bring in. So big Thanks to nisa for allowing that as an Avenue for all of us to listen to it. And I'm going to just shut up now.
Thanks thank you, Marilee, for your honesty and sharing all that. Does anyone have any responses to merilee? You see Tammy over it in the chat? I appreciate my role as a valued ally. There's also an interesting discussion going on in the chat about the experience of working with consultants.
I wonder if anyone, Randy Orton Daisy, would like to elaborate. Yeah just around the. Hello that's the reason why probably some organizations prefer to hire consultants because they feel like they need something they cannot find and they trust more consultants.
So we listening to. The people who voice the concern of these things have been some kind of. Her confirmation from outside organizations allowed them to make decision just. Kind of. But so they should have to pay because then they get a very nice formatted report that they can act upon or not act upon, depending on whether you like the results or not.
The comments from my comment. Something about the consultants not always provide the specific. It's also interesting because. I don't know why. It's probably the way the consultant's been. If you never find specifics, avoid some kind of. Greetings from the client.
What is this? He's interesting. Perspective is there anyone else present who's had experience working? Consultants and wants to comment on the kind of information that they get back.
Chris hi, everybody. Chris I'm also from ORCID. I think I've got some kind of adjacent information. Like many organizations, I think we formed an internal D committee about three years ago. I'll start to get involved and try and figure out what we should do as an organization about Dia. And I think we reached a similar conclusion that expecting staff to kind of contribute in this area as a volunteer activity wasn't the right way to go about it.
We didn't end up, though, reaching out to consultants. What we did was kind of take the view that Dia, like many things, needs to permeate everything we do as an organization, and it should be woven into our core planning processes and our core prioritization processes. And what we essentially did was go through a process of figuring out which concrete, pragmatic steps could we take as part of our work to advance Dia in our services and our internal organization, and then essentially hold our leadership team accountable for each of those actions.
So we actually published a public dashboard on our website. This several dozen activities I think that we're aiming to take forward, some of those have moved quicker. Some of those are moving more slowly, but they are woven into our plans and we actually hold ourselves accountable to our community through that public dashboard, but also to our staff for the leadership team moving us forward.
So I just thought I'd offer that as a different perspective of what the approach we ended up taking. And Chris, do you do you find that education is a big part of what you need to do? Taking on the idea on an institutional basis. I mean, I think our context is a little bit different in that we're a very international organization. Right and we have staff in 12 countries already.
So, of course, there are things we need to change and improve. But I think that gave us a little bit more kind of a breadth, breadth of perspective and a breadth of opinions to kind of base our actions on. So, I mean, I think everybody experiences that kind of initial, gosh, I don't know about enough about this to make any progress. But I think what we did was kind of look throughout the lens of our organizational values, openness, trust and inclusivity, which kind of align with Dia and look at our work and try to really ground this in the concrete things we can contribute as an organization.
Thank you. So there's an interesting comment from Daisy in the chat here about continue education credits. License renewal requirements.
What is the landscape like for the AIA licensing? Is there. Such a thing. Is there need to be. You're not. I'm not aware of any licensing. I mean, certainly when we went out looking for a consultant, we just relied on comparable organizations and their word of mouth, you know, experience with consultants, people who had done the kind of work that we were looking for.
Thank you. So here's a question that Rachel posed a little earlier about priorities. There's obviously a lot of worthy topics and initiatives under the Dia umbrella. So what do our attendees here think are the top priorities right now in 2023?
Alternatively, is there anything that could be implemented relatively easily and quickly? Perhaps adopting something more broadly that's already been implemented locally somewhere else.
This gets into kind of a bit of a question about momentum to India as a sort of can't really call it a movement but it's a relatively recent. Renewed interest in this. So how are we feeling about it in 2023? Camille this was my question originally so I can try to clarify what I was thinking.
Again, there are so many different topics. And initiatives that would improve D-day for some segments of our communities in a variety of different ways. And I think it becomes challenging where it's sort of hard to know where to start and what to prioritize. And that could be just through nice work items or it could be on a local organizational level.
I think what I've experienced therefore, is that it becomes what somebody's sort of personal pet project is or something about which they're particularly passionate, either because it impacts them or someone in their community, particularly. And so there are so many different places, I guess potentially to go. And again, maybe this gets back to this idea of perfectionism, but like it becomes overwhelming almost to know where to start.
And so I guess I was trying to think a bit more. Are there things that folks in this group have implemented themselves at their organization have tried, maybe not successfully, that could be shared and potentially adopted or sort of put to the side, depending on the success rate, sort of more immediately, sort of that kind of low hanging fruit kind of concept or sort of stepping back. And really what are the priorities or what the priorities really should be and where we should be devoting our efforts?
Because again, with primarily volunteer led organizations, obviously there are limitations. Well, I'd like to be able to answer that, if that's OK. But I think Andrew has his hand out. Huh? Yeah. I was just going to say one comment and this sort of gets out. I would merely was saying about perfectionism too is we have harmful language in some of our databases and we could fix all the language or come up with a big system for fixing that.
Or we could actually put out a statement that says we have harmful language in our databases and acknowledge it. So I think don't be afraid of the small steps that you can take before you get to the bigger steps and the bigger project. So acknowledging that there's a problem at the outset, I think is the easy thing we can all do. Just acknowledge that things are messed up and that we're working hard to fix them, but we're not going to sandbag and wait until everything's perfect because frankly, it'll never be perfect.
But do the easy things first. Well, I think that's great advice, Andrew. And I think that every organization that has harmful and disrespectful language should be actually putting that disclaimer into their databases already. And hopefully we've had enough momentum for people to realize that. But if you haven't, there's a lot of really good examples all over of people putting that in there, that there may be harmful language in their databases and to provide a form of feedback for that so that people can point out where that is.
But I do think that one of the ways that I would answer this is to say when I look at things like whether it's libraries or archives, it's about the whole system. And so when we look at whether it's databases that we're providing or standards, it's really about starting at the base level and saying we want to be respectful to all people, regardless of their religion, their race, their gender, their abilities, what they're ableism is we want to be respectful of everyone.
So starting from that foundational level is really important and it becomes less overwhelming. I think when you start from that framework of respect and thinking about things from creating relationships. And so when you start from that place, yes, there's a lot that needs to be addressed. I mean, the colonial legacy that we're all trying to address to what was centuries. And so we're not going to do it overnight, but it is about taking those steps.
But it has to be foundational because if we always go after the low hanging fruit, then that's all that's going to get changed until the next person. Something happens to the next person, and there's another big uprising. And we've almost become in some ways desensitized to that, to the harms that we're actually creating and what's actually happening and that, you know, these things are actually really fundamental.
But if we start with that and we start with a Foundation of reference for other, that makes such a huge difference when you're looking at it. And then you can look at that and say, how can we make these changes that are really structural? And a lot of them are structural and it is about undoing that structure. So I'm not about burning it down, but I'm about making big changes where people actually see the difference in their everyday life.
And it starts to change things for the future. And so to me, yes, it might seem like we're not we're just scratching the surface, but every single step makes a difference. And so thinking about it in that way, but really starting from foundation, because it's a domino effect, it'll change other things. You'll see where you need to actually make changes. And I think it's really important, especially about name changes because how do we have alternative way of describing ourselves and how do we actually include people's nations into their credentials?
When we're doing peer reviewed articles, we don't have a place for that. We have their employer, but that's not who they are. That that doesn't mean just because I work at the University of Fraser valley, which is amazing place to work. But it still means that I'm going to tell 10 from the tell 10 nation and I want to be able to say that I'm both tell 10 and a Canadian.
And so those are little things, but they're big things to indigenous people. So how do we even make space for people to actually have that? And I think it is by having those harm the apology for harmful language and then having a place for feedback and starting to listen to other people and what they mean. But it is about talking to community and saying, what would you like us to start on?
First, if we don't speak to people and we don't create that relationship, how do you know what they would like? Thank you. Marilyn, did you have your hand up a moment ago? Go ahead and ask Vicky's question. I'm putting some stuff into chat. OK so Vicki asks.
She says this is a slightly different question. Direction what? It's about best practices for gender and preferred name. Data fields. Examples students who might be transitioning and reveal different aspects of their evolving and emerging identities. How do we respectfully handle their journey in our online systems?
Also, how do we approach with authors over their scholarly work? How do we approach authors with authors over their scholarly lifespan? Will some scholars be OK with connections to dead names and others? Not I can talk about the author piece, at least to an extent. I think there are a lot of publishers and journals that have implemented policies of allowing authors to request name changes without asking what the reason for that change might be.
And I think a piece of that is then once those changes are implemented, or I guess I should even back up and say that those changes are now allowed. I think that there was sort of a view for quite some time that they should never be changed. The scholarly record needed to be set in stone the way that it was. And I think attitudes about that have changed quite a lot over the last few years.
And so when publishers and journals that are making these changes sort of after the fact, you know, if there are any co-authors letting co-authors know that an update has been made, but without necessarily saying what that update is. But giving the author who's asking for that name change, sort of that opportunity, do they want to self disclose? Do they.
Would they prefer that the publisher do again, some of that heavy lifting for them because making these requests and name changes can become burdensome if you have to contact each individual journal or each individual publisher Plus many other organizations perhaps in your life. So I think those are definitely a couple of things that have been happening and more and more. And I think that there's then this view that some authors and again giving these authors the choice, but some of them are very happy to have some sort of correction notice published to explain the change.
And there are some benefits to that right now, I think, especially when it comes to down streaming and abstracting and indexing services. So communicating the changes that have been made perhaps on the publishers individual platforms to these other communities as well, but also that equally respecting that some of these authors may want to be more private about this and recognizing those limitations.
So again, I think it's about communication and collaboration with the authors who are making the change in particular. Thank you. Cipolla has put a link to the style. Which describes how to cite an author who has transitioned.
Earlier on, Todd added in the chat, if there are people on this call who would be willing to participate in the nice change working group, please drop a note to Nitti. Nitti here. Nitti what stage are you? In terms of forming the working group. Actually, we have a group of people who had expressed interest and I had gone through that before Christmas to try to pull the group together in January, but then got some projects that needed to get out the door.
So those are getting published now. That nice place is over where they hope to get back to the group and pull together the co-chairs and start moving forward. I'm sorry about the delays. So you're just getting started. Time to get in. For anyone who wants to get involved.
And then Vincent has an example here in his company, there was a ground level push for better idea that upper management responded to. And now there are several groups of interested colleagues and specific roles focused on different segments.
Well, I guess before I forget, I would like to post a link to our final hole in the chat here. This final poll is asking what you think. Which actions are still needed to create a diverse, equitable, inclusive and accessible research environment. Feel free to include your name and email address if you'd like to volunteer to work on said problem.
And this will stay open. If you want to copy the link and think about it and respond later, that's fine. And I will be sharing this with the Dea.
Any final thoughts? We're new directions that we haven't started yet. Angie Gregg. Emily so I just want to say this will catch Paula by surprise. But we've just made an editorial decision on the fly to update our indexing manual to show an example of the tribal affiliation for author affiliation.
So thank you, Camille, for reminding us that that is possible. We can certainly create a new metadata field, but we already have one metadata field. So let's use it. Let's give an example. That's terrific news. Thank you so much, Greg, for sharing that.
Sure news release so we can share it. Yeah things are happening. OK so I was just thinking as I was typing in something into that form, thinking back to Caleb's presentation this morning and I have no idea how to do this, but I think it'd be interesting to think about or get a group of people thinking about how we as a community can include non-English content in a more robustly in the skull of the ecosystem to support the careers and research of those who's english, for whom English isn't their first language.
That was a real strong call from Dr. COVID this morning. Be interested to see if there's something that could be done about that, how we could do something about that, you know, expand the things that highlight the things that people are doing in that area that are successful. And how can we replicate that? It just seems like a. Not easy, but huge task for our community.
Yeah that that was a very striking point also that he made that. For many of the languages that he is working with and the he's familiar with in Kenya. And this is true of languages all over the world. They are they only recently have acquired a written form. And it would be it would certainly be best to have content in indigenous languages in a video or audio format.
And at the time I was thinking to myself to we do index an international bibliography, scholarly journals about sign languages, but the abstracts of the articles by and large are written in a written language and the abstracts are in the written language. It would be great to have video abstracts for those, at least, if not video articles, which we would also include. So I would think the same thing for any language.
What one thought on this. You know, I think one of the things about languages is, is there's a philosophical design approach. Right but if you design your system so that it treats all languages equally, you can be a much better and a much better place.
And what many, many systems do that have tried to deal with languages as they have a default language, they assume all the data is in English and in our context, and then they try and bolt on the option for translating certain fields into translated languages or whatever do you think is a terrible approach? So I think the answer to your question, Todd, is, I think, really interesting to have some discussions around design patents for supporting multiple languages equally from the get go.
And also the much harder thing is if you've got a system that's not been designed with that approach in mind, how you sort that out, which is hard to do from a technical point of view. Right but I think if you're starting out from that point about adding translation fields all over the place, it's always going to be unequal because you've already kind of baked in that assumption that one language is privileged among others.
That's a really interesting perspective, Chris. I hadn't given it, hadn't thought too deeply about the, you know, information architecture necessary there. But I totally agree with you and. I expect that's probably. I expect there's probably development challenges with having a language agnostic system.
One of the points that came out of the session that I moderated Thursday on multi-language metadata was that there is an ISO code for multiple languages, but it doesn't allow you to further add codes to say which languages those are. So you can mark something with an ISO three that are code for multiple languages, but then you have to find another data field to state which languages are part of the multiple.
Have we got beyond flat file at a data structures. Yeah all right. Well, we're just about out of time. So I'd like to thank all these presenters and all of the audience members for the work that you all do on a voluntary basis. And please feel free to volunteer in that poll or share it with someone and have a good rest of the conference.
Thank you, everyone. Thank you. Thank you so much.