|      Articles Urban Design on the Internet: RUDI, a case study in practiceA Paper By Alan Reeve, Rowena Rouse, Catherine Tranmer, Bill Worthington. RUDI is jointly run by the University of Hertfordshire and
    Oxford Brookes University http://rudi.herts.ac.uk/ Introduction
      Urban design would seem like an appropriate testing ground for developing an Internet
      based resource , constituted as it is quite naturally of a complex range of materials and
      media, from theory to practice, from simple text to 3D representations. This was, indeed,
      an initial rationale behind the funding and establishment of RUDI (Resource for Urban Design Information see
      Fig. 1). It would answer, that is, to an anticipated demand for diverse data, information,
      polemic and instances of good practice, and be an experimental site providing sufficient
      (hyper)textual depth to challenge the most innovative theoretical and technical
      structures. After all, architects in education and practice have for some time been
      exploring the new medium and its glossy possibilities. But the RUDI team wanted to provide something with more coherence, depth and, untrendy
      as it might seem, seriousness than most sites appeared to be offering at the inception of
      the project a year ago. This was the big issue whose scale has become apparent only slowly
      as the project has developed. It was not just a matter of defining a hitherto healthily
      unbounded subject, or of constructing a sufficiently comprehensive, iterational and
      intelligent knowledge structure - even if the available search engines had been able to
      cope with all of this, which they were not. It was also a matter of the relative
      unfamiliarity of urban designers with the new information technology of the web, and the
      apparently baroque difficulties of acquiring, assembling, reinterpreting and publishing
      material of any worthwhile content in this brave new medium. The Web has been
      fantastically over hyped in the last few short years. The reality is that using it to
      deliver services of any quality comparable with those readily available through the older
      and seemingly archaic and dry delivery systems - like books and journals, housed in
      libraries with relatively easy to follow cataloguing systems - raises some fundamental
      questions about the transferability of information from the old technology to the new, as
      well as broader issues to do with the technical culture of users - particularly of design
      and academic professionals. This short paper reviews RUDI from the inside, as it were, reflecting on the issues
      above, drawing out some tentative lessons and conclusions about the limitations and
      possibilities of the Internet as a medium for delivering real content for those interested
      in the design of the built environment.  
 Figure 1. The RUDI Home page Background to RUDI  (see RUDI Welcome Page for full
    project details) 
      RUDI was started in January of 1996 under the eLib programme, funded by the JISC on
      behalf of the UK Higher Education Funding Councils, and the British Library Research and
      Innovation Centre, with hardware support from Sun Microsystems Ltd. It is jointly run by
      the Engineering Research and Development Centre (ERDC) at the University of Hertfordshire
      from where the project is managed and where the server is located, and the Library at
      Oxford Brookes University, where material is selected, acquired and edited. In the the
      first instance it has funding for three years, to the tune of around £110,000 per annum..
      This funding supports a well configured server (with 37Gb of capacity), data acquisition
      costs, and approximately two and a half full time staff. After the three years of
      dedicated funding the project is intended to become self supporting through a number of
      mechanisms to be developed as part of the programme.  The joint application of the two institutions arose in the first instance because both
      have become acknowledged centres of excellence in their respective fields: the ERDC for
      its expertise in computing in relation to information delivery systems and software along
      with expertise in digitising information in the subject area, and Brookes for its research
      and teaching in Urban Design, Planning and Architecture and for its Library's collection
      of relevant material. Of course, a by-product of this cooperation is, hopefully, a greater
      understanding between the two cultures of information technology and design represented in
      the two universities. Aims
      The aims of the project from the outset were similarly multi layered. The principal
      justification at a one level was and remains to provide a significant hypermedia
      collection of material on the topic of urban design of use to academics, practitioners and
      others. As a part of this objective is the value added possibility that the resource is
      dynamic and capable of being edited 'on-line', and the further possibility of allowing
      direct authoring by contributors. After eighteen months work in acquiring, marking up and
      configuring material in the subject area, RUDI can claim to have shown itself to be an
      exemplary resource in terms of these objectives: already there is a wealth of material -
      from journal articles, case studies and bibliographies, to a catalogue of other planning,
      architecture and urban design sites, an interactive discussion area, and various UK
      Government produced material. These explicit aims and justification for the resource, clearly, have implicit and more
      subtle objectives with somewhat more problematic outcomes. The first of these is the
      development of a content structure with an appropriate searching and cataloguing mechanism
      which can deal with different forms of document, arising from different types of author,
      containing different kinds of material and potentially overlapping in terms of users
      expectations, interests and heuristic readings. Put more simply, the nature of both
      subject and material type requires a highly sophisticated search system to cope with any
      endogenous and exogenous demands that might be placed on it. The question becomes, where
      to draw the line for the purposes of providing a reasonably usable search tool, Fig 2). 
 Figure 2. The current Search page Limits to Searching
      This then has been the first real challenge to the project, and anyone out there who
      has been attempting to create a properly searchable site will undoubtedly have had similar
      experiences. The tools are not yet available, although they are being developed. For
      example, RUDI currently uses the 'Netscape Verity' search engine which allows full text
      boolean searching. This is a powerful instrument, however herein lies its weakness. For
      example, a boolean search for Oxford and traffic retrieves all occurrences of these
      words within a document whether or not they have a syntactic relationship. This means that
      users have to plough through numerous documents to find those that are actually of
      relevance. To overcome these problems, RUDI has been experimenting with metadata and its
      associated tools. Metadata is the internet equivalent of a traditional library catalogue
      record. A metadata record will be created for each discrete item of information on the
      resource. The metadata will include standardised subject keywords and standardised place
      names. A separate metadata search engine (in this case 'Netscape Catalogue Server')
      will be used to search this data. By indexing the resource in this way, it is hoped to
      overcome the inherent problems associated with natural language searching. At the outset of RUDI, metadata tools were very primitive. This has therefore been an
      important and pioneering aspect of the project, in so far as the RUDI team have been able
      to develop focused searching methods such as keyword and location specific searching, and
      automatic searching from an evolving controlled vocabulary. The implications of this aspect of the development of such a resource are potentially
      uncomfortable: and for any one considering creating a site of equivalent breadth and depth
      need to be thought about at the outset. Embedding keywords or some other type of metadata
      in documents retrospectively can be a massive task, and the superimposition of
      templates on material already configured is not without its technical problems. The key to
      successful structuring and searching is to get the search mechanism in place at the
      outset. This makes describing and structuring documents much more manageable and efficient
      compared with a post-hoc approach. Again, RUDI has gone a long way in exploring these
      issues and successfully answering their challenge.  What RUDI offers: the philosophical and practical issues for urban design and
    related subjects. 
      The problem of creating efficient and appropriate tools for searching is doubly
      difficult in a field such as urban design where there is, for example, no existing and
      generally accepted set of subject terms or even categories. This is hardly surprising
      given the political and ideological volatility and vulnerability of the subject, its
      susceptibility to changes in academic as well as practice fashion and fads. There is at
      least an apparent contradiction, that is, between the healthily anarchic and
      anti-positivist attitude in a subject like design, and the technologically strict, binary
      structures and systems of the new information technology which are, on the face of it,
      highly unreflexive. It is perhaps a philosophical as much as a technical question whether
      this apparent contradiction can or even ought to be overcome, or whether it might
      not actually be healthier to simply accept it as the fly in the ointment of the new age of
      information. On a more mundane note, work on RUDI has also brought to light the real problems of
      material acquisition and translation. Aside from issues of taxonomy or classification,
      actually getting hold of material and rendering it into a style and format which can be
      used on the Internet raises a number of complex and challenging issues. In our experience
      RUDI is an unusual and rare Internet site in an important respect. Unlike the majority of
      other sites in planning (for example the exemplary PAIRC) or architecture (for example Archinet), we are more than a gateway to
      other gateways or smaller resources. One major aim of RUDI all along has been to
      disseminate and make available real material with real content. Of course there are other
      sites which in part do this (for instance the Congress of the New Urbanism , which
      has links to the work of a number of practices closely linked to the movement). However,
      such sites are either predicated on the values and outlook of a particular lobby, pressure
      group or other limited constituency with a proselytising rationale; or they are commercial
      or governmental sites, again each with their own particular and structuring raison d'etre.
      RUDI is not like this. As a basic resource for the whole field of design in the built
      environment addressed to any one with an interest in that field it has no special access
      to material published elsewhere, or to a ready supply of new documents generated for other
      purposes. It has to rely that is on what it can author itself (for example case studies
      such as Gloucester Green
      Fig. 3), or what it can persuade authors and other publishers to give it (for example, Caring for Our Towns and Cities),
      or, material which comes to hand which is copyright free or where copyright can be agreed
      with publishers (for example, the Urban Design Group Source
      Book and the Urban Design
      Quarterly Fig. 4). 
 Figure 3. Sample case study top page: Gloucester Green 
 Figure 4. Top page: Urban Design Quarterly The consequence of this is that RUDI has had to be pioneering in its approach to
      copyright. The project has a standard publishing agreement which Hertfordshire
      University's lawyers have produced largely without precedent. This must be completed and
      signed before material can be published on the site. The unfortunate but unavoidable
      consequence is that instead of the whole process of authoring and publishing being more
      rapid and immediate (the so called and much vaunted space-time compression possibilities
      of the information age) it is in this respect more bureaucratic and often slower than for
      other publishing media.  Likewise with the issue of authoring and translating for the Web, as it might be
      called. There is nothing immediate let alone instantaneous about marking up, OCR'ing
      (Optical Character Recognition) or scanning. The constraints of the standard software and
      the unpredictability of what browser any one user is looking at or how it is configured,
      means that often only an approximation to the original can be given.  Largely because of the built in and uncertain user limits - for example is the surfer
      running a 286 or does she/he have an mmx pentium processor inside with a browser that can
      support tables, VRML, etc. - the RUDI team often have to make necessary compromises and go
      for an assumed common denominator. This can be highly frustrating when creativity runs
      ahead of technical capacity.   Technical Competence and the Culture of Use
      More seriously, the tests we have conducted as part of the project into users'
      perceptions and actual use are illuminating in terms of the technical competence that is
      out there. It is clear that while some academics and even practitioners are competent and
      confident in using the new information technologies, many are only tentatively acquainted
      with the intricacies of browsing and navigation. When designing for a screen of,
      optimistically, 14 inches, there is little room to give blow by blow instructions.
      Designers and academics can, on the whole, be assumed to have some imagination and the
      capacity to interpret and experiment in order to navigate, but there is clearly a need for
      research into how best to optimize layouts, the design of navigation buttons etc, as well
      as to develop the interface technology and style so that moving about a complex and
      multi-layered site becomes a thing of excited anticipation rather than an experience
      suffused with the fear of getting lost in some Gothic labyrinth. The other key finding from our research into user's attitudes is that those with no Net
      authoring experience are often unrealistic in their expectations. Again there is a
      paradox. The Web has been (self) promoted as individualistic and potentially anarchic,
      capable of fitting the needs and desires of individual users at the point of design and
      production - at the authoring stage. It can also be highly reflexive if the means of
      production are the right ones: feedback forms, and a team of individuals able and
      resourced to respond to such demands. But, at the point of consumption, despite the hype,
      the user is largely stuck with what they are given: and then only in the form their
      machine can be set up to receive - unless she or he has access to a great deal of memory
      and storage to save and remanipulate material. Of course the technology is in its infancy, and needs to be nurtured and disciplined.
      The screens we look at now will probably seem, in ten or twenty years time, like the
      flickering and dim shadows Logie Baird first witnessed at the advent of the television
      age, as compared with the sharp and in your face images of the emergent wide and flat
      screen technology.   Conclusion
      RUDI has shown us that we have to work with the technology that is available,
      accessible and already familiar: designing such a site requires both an acceptance of the
      knowledge and skills lag - practitioners and academics are likely for the most part always
      to be a step behind the technophiles - and a willingness to experiment and take risky
      steps with as yet untested tools. There is a danger that the effort and money required to
      produce real content will prove so unsupportable that the Web as used by design
      professionals and academics will end up looking like a serpent chasing its own tail.
      However, RUDI has demonstrated that this does not have to be the case. It has shown that
      it is possible to build, maintain and develop a site with real content of use and interest
      to a wide range of individuals - from academics to practitioners. This is evident in the
      fact that its corpus of material is growing week by week, largely because of the
      enthusiasm of its constituency. We are keenly aware that there is a massive demand for the
      sort of resources RUDI offers. It is this above all that encourages us to overcome the
      challenges outlined in this paper and that , in our view, means that we shall continue to
      pioneer delivery of information through this new and exciting medium.   ^ top |   Editorial Articles Submit Journal Home OLP Home |