"They're all going out to something weird": workflow, legacy and metadata in the music production process

In this paper we use results from two ethnographic studies of the music production process to examine some key issues regarding how work is currently accomplished in studio production environments. These issues relate in particular to workflows and how metadata is adapted to the specific needs of specific parts of the process. We find that there can be significant tensions between how reasoning is applied to metadata at different stages of production and that this can lead to overheads where metadata has to be either changed or created anew to make the process work. On the basis of these findings we articulate some of the potential solutions we are now examining. These centre in particular upon the notions of Digital/Dynamic Musical Objects and flexible metadata shells

Object reuse and exchange for publishing and sharing workflows

The workflow paradigm can provide the means to describe the complete functional pipeline for a scientific experiment and therefore expose the underlying scientific processes for enabling the reproducibility of results. However, current means for exposing such information are tied closely to the individual workflow engines and there is no existing method that provides a common way to share this information. In this paper, we discuss a lightweight approach that can be used to expose such information, using the Open Archives Initiative Object Reuse and Exchange (ORE) standard, to provide a common format for representing and sharing workflows and their associated metadata required for their execution. We describe how workflows can be mapped to the ORE format using RDF and how they can be stored using bundles for sharing with others. We discuss tooling we have developed that provides a mechanism for existing workflow engines to conveniently export workflows as ORE bundles. We present three use cases for Triana, ASKALON and MOTEUR, where such integration has already been undertaken, and conclude the paper by providing a short study showing that the overhead implications of adopting the proposed ORE bundling format are minimal

Negotiating Software: Redistributing Control at Work and on the Web

Since the 1970s, digital technologies increasingly determine who gets what, when, and how; and the workings of informational capitalism have concentrated control over those technologies into the hands of just a few private corporations. The normative stance of this dissertation is that control over software should be distributed and subject to processes of negotiation: consensus-based decision making oriented towards achieving collective benefits. It explores the boundaries of negotiating software by trying to effect a change in two different kinds of software using two different approaches. The first approach targets application software – the paradigmatic model of commodified, turn-key computational media – in the context of knowledge work – labour that involves the creation and distribution of information through non-routine, creative, and abstract thinking. It tries to effect change by developing negotiable software as an alternative to the autocratic application model, which is software that embeds the support for distributed control in and over its design. These systems successfully demonstrate the technological feasibility of this approach, but also the limitations of design as a solution to systemic power asymmetries. The second approach targets consent management platforms – pop-up interfaces on the web that capture visitor’s consent for data processing – in the context of the European Union’s data protection regulation. It tries to effect change by employing negotiation software, which is software that supports existing processes of negotiation in complex systems, i.e., regulatory oversight and the exercise of digital rights. This approach resulted in a considerable increase in data protection compliance on Danish websites, but showed that sustainable enforcement using digital tools also requires design changes to data processing technologies. Both approaches to effecting software change – making software negotiable and using software in negotiations – revealed the drawbacks of individualistic strategies. Ultimately, the capacity of the liberal subject to stand up against corporate power is limited, and more collective approaches to software negotiation need to be developed, whether when making changes to designs or leveraging regulation