On-Line Interpretation

On-Line Interpretation Information

With the development of the Internet and the World Wide Web, museums now can take advantage of a new mode of interpretation for their collections. On-line interpretation (also known by a variety of names including "virtual exhibit") offers remarkable capabilities in terms of visitor access from locations remote to the museum's physical facility, and in addition inherently encourages a level of interaction that is difficult to achieve in more conventional forms of interpretation. Moreover, on-line interpretation can be developed at much less cost than conventional physical exhibitry, and does not require us to deal with collection protection issues.

On the other hand, notwithstanding recent dramatic improvements in "virtual reality" capabilities, most museums continue to feel that on-line interpretation cannot provide the visitor with the elusive quality of experiencing "the real thing" which remains the definitive advantage of physical exhibits. But on-line interpretation does provide a remarkable tool for preparing visitors prior to a museum visit, and for providing in-depth interactive interpretation that supplements exhibits and educational programs conducted at the museum.

On-line interpretation development generally involves a preliminary planning phase followed by a design/production phase. Note that (unlike exhibit development) the design and the production of on-line interpretive content tends to be inextricably bound together. Let's briefly look at the on-line interpretation development process....

Phase 1: Planning

Planning for on-line interpretation involves a number of considerations relevant to the success of the development process:

What is the purpose (interpretive goal)?
Who is the intended audience (both in terms of content and computing capabilities)?
What collection data, images, and other information are available?
What is the project budget?
Who will design and produce the on-line interpretive content?
What is the project timeframe?
What server will house the completed project?
How should the on-line interpretation relate to the museum's other interpretive efforts?

The answers to the questions will likely be unique for each project, although it is wise to review other similar projects for helpful hints. The planning is best carried out by a team representing all the parties with a stake in various aspects of the project. The team may consist of in-house personnel as well as outside expertise in on-line development.

The planning team should provide several products at the conclusion of the planning process:

A basic plan document that summarizes the project's purpose, the intended audience and their likely computer capabilities, the available data, the budget, the responsible parties, the timeframe, the server, and other relevant matters.
A preliminary document that identifies the interpretive themes, along with text, graphics, and other data relevant to those themes.
Preliminary suggestions as to how the interpretive content should be organized (taking into account the multi-layed, inter-linked nature of web content).

The planning products should be reviewed and approved by the museum's board, thus ensuring that the entire museum and all parties interested in the project are working in unison. A package of these products can then be given to the designer/producer as the basis for the remaining phases.

Phase 2: Design and production

Although there are several different ways to implement on-line interpretation, in this document we will only address the Internet-based World Wide Web, which is undoubtedly the most widely used and accepted approach. Although still relatively young, the web has matured somewhat, and web-based interpretive content can now accommodate quite sophisticated interpretive needs. Web content can be produced by almost anyone with basic computer literacy, but quality interpretive content usually requires some degree of sophistication in conceptual design and graphic design as well as mastery of enabling technologies. Some museums retain in-house capabilities to produce web content, while others prefer to contract with outside web designers/producers.

The web content designer/producer must be able to cope with many issues. At a minimum, he/she must be able to assemble web pages from supplied information using HTML coding or a ("what-you-see-is-what-you-get") HTML editor, to provide basic navigation, and to upload files to an appropriate server. Beyond these mechanical aspects, he/she should understand conceptual design, and have an acceptable level of mastery of graphic design and copywriting. For more advanced projects, he/she may need to deal with client-side programming (e.g., JavaScript), server-side programming (e.g. CGI), on-line databases, security (e.g., password access), and other enabling technologies.

Beyond these web technologies, the designer/producer who wishes to create good on-line interpretation must also understand how museum interpretation works, which is often best learned through previous experience in more conventional types of museum interpretation such as exhibits and/or educational programs.

In some larger projects, it may be necessary to obtain additional services for the production of graphics, including images, maps, artwork, and other graphic items. Also, the implementation of a substantial on-line database with sophisticated search capabilities may require additional programming expertise. However, most modest projects can probably be implemented by a single web designer/producer with generalized knowledge of these issues.

The product of the design/production phase is, of course, the web content itself, completed and uploaded to the server, ready for use by the museum's on-line visitors.

Follow-up: Evaluation, Maintenance, Upgrades

Museums should consider implementing an appropriate evaluation process to ensure that the on-line interpretation actually meets its interpretive goals. Perhaps the best evaluation approach involves setting up an on-line evaluation form by which visitors can send their responses directly to the museum.

The museum should be prepared to maintain and upgrade the web content as needed. The museum might find it advantageous to contract with the designer/producer for ongoing web services on a retainer basis. In many cases, the necessary maintenance can be provided by in-house staff, if the original product was designed to accommodate that approach.

Return to Exhibit and On-Line Interpretation Home Page