Filed under: metrics
Collection/archiving: the national library system, the LOC,
Redundant storage: non-library archives, DARPANet and its spawn and widespread use,
Transmission/accessibility: DARPANet and its spawn, explicit accessibility programs to overcome certain obstacles, etc, etc.
Identific/Categoriz/Contextualiz ation: Official systems [DDS, LOC, etc], librarians, publishers [self-help].
Review/Analysis/Comparison: Critics | Professors, assistants in relevant topical Fields | Historians | Professors, assistants in field devoted to relevant medium (literature, music, video, etc). Often w/ stark delineation (mutual oblivion?) among the analyses of these four (more?) groups.
There’s not much up there that makes use of, or even allows for, contributions by the vast bulk of people affected by these works; their audiences, readers without time or inclination to polish their reactions to a high sheen and 10 column inches, etc. Only the second applies, really, and then only the last part of it — the part that was wholly accidental.
Is this foolishness? Failure of government to adapt to the multiplying ways in which it can be useful?