metadata: schemas and other european projects michael day ukoln: the uk office for library and...
TRANSCRIPT
Metadata: SCHEMAS and other European projects
Michael Day
UKOLN: the UK Office for Library and Information Networking, University of Bath
First Austrian Metadata Seminar,
Vienna, 18 May 2001
Contents
Metadata projects
SCHEMAS project overview
Other European metadata developments:
• Dublin Core
• Subject gateways
• Structural metadata
• Preservation metadata
Metadata (1)
The SCHEMAS project
Forum for Metadata Schema Implementers
Partners
• PricewaterhouseCoopers Technology Consultants (PwC)
• German National Research Centre for Information Technology (GMD)
• UK Office for Library and Information Networking, University of Bath (UKOLN)
Audience
Who?• Metadata schema designers
• Projects under the EU’s IST programme (Multimedia Content and Tools) and national initiatives
What for?
• Information, guidance and tools for the description of Web resources of all kinds
• Helping designers to use what is already there
Domains
Industry
Publishing and rights management
Audio-visual production and distribution
Cultural heritage
Education
Research
Academic services
Geospatial information
Other (e.g. Government)
• Not just Dublin Core
• No ‘best way’ of doing things
Needs
General need for:
• Standard methods for content description
• Multiplicity of schemas, mixing and matching general and specific sets
But:
• There is some duplication of effort, competition between standards and schemas
• Potential confusion for implementers
Re-use
Why re-use existing schemas?
• Not re-inventing wheels
• Potential use of standard tools
• Higher potential interoperability
End result:
• Reduction of cost, now and in the future
• Enlarging the potential audience
• Interoperability
The information gap
Metadata schemas already identified:
• Over 200 implementation activities
• Around 90 standardisation activities
• Very different levels of information
Conclusions:
• Good information about schemas is badly needed
• Need for mutual understanding, hopefully leading to harmonisation
SCHEMAS provides ...
Information provision
• Metadata Watch Reports
• Standards Framework Reports
• Guidance material
Workshops
Registry implementation
• Schemas, application profiles, people, projects, standards, tools, guidelines
SCHEMAS resultsWorkshops:
– Bath, UK, June 2000
– Bonn, Germany, November 2000
– Budapest, Hungary, May 2001
– (The Hague, Netherlands)
http://www.schemas-forum.org/workshops/
Metadata Watch Reports (3):http://www.schemas-forum.org/metadata-watch/
Standards Framework Reports (1):http://www.schemas-forum.org/stds-framework/
SCHEMAS Registry
Experience with prototype registry developed by DESIRE II project
The registry is the place to publish metadata schemas:
• ‘namespace schemas’
• ‘application profile schemas’
As well as other information about schemas, e.g.:
• standards, projects, people, tools, etc.
Thick registry
ThickRegistry
Namespaceschema App
profile
Sampledata
Mapping
Usageguide
Software tools Users
Thin registry
Thin Registry
Namespaceschema App
profile
Sampledata
Mapping
Usageguide
Software tools Users
Registry approach
The SCHEMAS registry will be:
• a ‘thick registry’ initially, with schemas registered at a central location
• develop into a ‘thin registry’ in the future, with pointers to schemas on the Web
The technical basis will be:
• RDF Schemas
• EOR toolkit
EOR Toolkit
Registry functions
Registration
• schemas from European projects and initiatives
• information and reviews from SCHEMAS domain correspondents
Searching
• Finding application profiles for re-use
• Finding information and guidance
Application profiles
What is an application profile?
• a schema identifying the use of elements from one or more namespaces in a particular application, with additional constraints
What is it used for?
• To publish this information for a human audience
• To help software configure
An overview of European metadata projects
European projects
IST projects (FP5):– SCHEMAS: Forum for Metadata Schema
implementers– Renardus: Academic Subject Gateway Service
Europe– ETB: The European Schools Treasury Browser– METAe: Metadata Engine– COLLATE: Collaboratory for Annotation,
Indexing and Retrieval of Digitized Historical Archive Material
– COVAX ...
FP4 projects:– Aquarelle– BIBLINK– DESIRE– EULER (European Libraries and
Electronic Resources in Mathematical Sciences)
– NEDLIB
Subject gateways
Social Science Information Gateway– One of the first UK gateways (1994)– Funded as a pilot project by the ESRC– Based at the Centre for Computing in
Economics (now Institute of Learning and Research Technology), University of Bristol
– A model for the development of other gateways
Follett Report
Joint Funding Councils’ Libraries Review Group (December 1993):
– JISC should fund the “development of a limited number of top level networking tools in the UK to encourage the growth of local subject access tools and information servers”
– Electronic Libraries Programme
eLib Programme
Follett Implementation Group on Information Technology (FIGIT)
Electronic Libraries Programme (eLib)– 1995-2001– Funded by Joint Information Systems
Committee (JISC)– 3 phases, funded 100+ projects grouped
together in various programme areas– Programme area for “Access to
Networked Resources” projects
eLib subject gateways (1)
The eLib-funded projects:– ADAM - Art, Design, Architecture and
Media– Biz/ed - Business education– EEVL - Engineering– History (previously IHR-Info)– OMNI - Biomedical sciences– SOSIG - Social sciences
– ROADS - providing software and support
eLib subject gateways (2)
Main functions:– Serve specific communities - usually
subject-based– Select Internet resources according to pre-
defined quality criteria– Create resource descriptions (metadata)– Display both search and browse interfaces
– Use of subject classification schemes and controlled vocabularies, links to thesauri
ROADS project
Resource Organisation and Discovery in Subject-based services
• Partners:– Department of Computer Studies,
Loughborough University– Institute of Learning and Research
Technology (ILRT), University of Bristol– UKOLN
http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/roads/
ROADS objectives
Main project objectives:– To develop a configurable software toolkit
for distributed resource discovery services– To support subject gateways (and
interoperability between them) with other tools and guidelines
– To implement and test relevant standards– To enable Web page authors to describe
their own resources and supply this metadata to gateways
ROADS standards (1)
Metadata format:• ROADS/IAFA templates
– A metadata format based on IAFA (Internet Anonymous FTP Archive) templates
– Internet-Draft– Simple – Text based– Pragmatic choice
ROADS standards (2)
Search protocol:• Whois++ search and retrieve protocol
– Internet standard (RFC)– Simple (lightweight)– Cross-searching across distributed
services– Query routing (centroids)
ROADS interoperability
Guidelines:– Template Registry
– Cataloguing guidelines
Metadata mappings– IAFA templates / USMARC / Dublin Core
Experimental Z39.50/Whois++ gateway
Project involvement in wider standardisation initiatives:
– Dublin Core
– Resource Description Framework
ROADS in use
ROADS software toolkit still in use:– SOSIG– Leeds University Library selected Web
sites– Finnish Virtual Library (FVL)
Software still available:– Developed as an open-source software
toolkit
http://www.roads.lut.ac.uk/
Taking eLib forwards ...
Towards end of eLib funding:– A recognition that gateways were useful
– “... subject gateways have embedded themselves into professional practice very swiftly” (1997)
– A need to consider sustainability– Most gateways are not embedded in
institutions– Most gateways operate on a ‘project’ basis,
short-term funding, research culture– Perceived to be in competition with each other
and with private sector suppliers
Subject gateways
Definition:• From Koch
Services
Projects
ROADS• UK Electronic Libraries Programme
DESIRE• EELS (Engineering Electronic Library
Sweden)• DutchESS
SSG-FI ...
Broker services
Acquarelle
EULER
AGORA (eLib)
RDN
Renardus
RDN
Resource Discovery Network:– Funded by the JISC– Launched in November 1999
Objectives:– To extend coverage to areas not covered by
the eLib gateways – To integrate access – To develop subject based portals for
educational communities– To establish new organisational and
business models (sustainability)
RDN Structure (1)
Centre (RDNC)– Part of JISC’s DNER (Distributed National
Distributed Resource) Office– Roles:
• Promoting and developing the network • Establishing frameworks to ensure quality,
consistency, and interoperability across the RDN
• Presenting gateways in various views to exploit their interdisciplinary and cross-sectoral value
RDN Structure (2)
Hubs– Faculty-level (higher education)– Some based on eLib subject gateways, others
newly established– Made up of one or more gateways– Catalogue resources using a variety of schema– Offer Z39.50 targets for a central cross-
searching service– Maximise potential for strategic partnerships
and commercial arrangements within subject domains
RDN (4)
http://www.rdn.ac.uk/
RDN Hubs
Hubs:• Biome• PSIgate• EEVL• Humbul• SOSIG
RDN broker service (1)
RDN provides a central broker service that can access resource descriptions in all gateways
– Service currently based on Whois++ cross-search
– Moving to a Z39.50 based broker using the Bath Profile
http://www.nlc-bnc.ca/bath/
Experiments with new architectures– e.g., based on sharing records through
interoperability agreements defined by the Open Archives Initiative (OAI)
SOSIG
SOSIG
Humbul
BIOME
RDN Broker‘ResourceFinder’
RDN broker service (2)
RDN interoperability
Cataloguing guidelines– mandatory fields, schemes and qualifiers– Draft rules for content based on DCMES– Minimum set includes: Title, Subject,
Description, Type, Identifier and Language.– Shared list of types
Ambition to provide common subject approach for cross-browsing
– co-operation with HILT project and Renardus
RDN sustainability
RDN currently has over 20,000 manually created records
70+ staff involved at about 30 UK institutions (many part-time)
New hubs planned:– creative arts & industries– tourism, leisure & hospitality– environment & geography
Is the RDN model sustainable?
Renardus (1)
Partners include:
http://www.renardus.org/
Renardus (2)
Renardus (3)
Renardus (4)
Other uses of metadata
Preservation (NEDLIB, Cedars)
Acknowledgements
UKOLN is funded by Resource: the Council for Museums, Archives & Libraries (the organisation that succeeded the Library and Information Commission), the Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC) of the UK higher and further education funding councils, as well as by project funding from the JISC and the European Union. UKOLN also receives support from the University of Bath where it is based.
http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/