Driver Guidelines and Repository Interoperability
Download as PPT, PDF1 like368 views
The document discusses the evolution of web technologies and the need for reliable content provision through interoperable metadata standards for electronic theses. It highlights challenges in interpreting semantics, data normalization, and the necessity of context-specific descriptions, along with recommendations for standard practices. Additionally, it emphasizes the importance of creating a global framework for enforcing repository interoperability guidelines to enhance data retrieval and management.
![TICER 2008, Tilburg Trouble automatically interpreting semantics ex. [date] (Cranfield) Effort interpreting dates <dc:contributor>Partington, David(supervisor)</dc:contributor> <dc:creator>Lupson, Jonathan</dc:creator> <dc:date>2007-06-06T18:17:13Z</dc:date> <dc:date>2007-06-06T18:17:13Z</dc:date> <dc:date>2007-02</dc:date> <dc:identifier>http://hdl.handle.net/1826/1729</dc:identifier> <dc:description> (Publication?) (Graduation?) (Start ?) Humboldt: <dc:date>2007-06-07</dc:date> (Graduation) <dc:date>2007-03-06</dc:date> (Publication) <dc:date>2003-02</dc:date> (Start) Recommendation: in Unqualified Dublin Core use one date field that represents the Publication date!](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/2008-11-15-baltimore-driver-interoperability-bymauricevanderfeesten-090612054056-phpapp02/85/Driver-Guidelines-and-Repository-Interoperability-8-320.jpg)
![TICER 2008, Tilburg Trouble automatically interpreting semantics ex. [type] Effort interpreting types DIVA: <dc:type>text.thesis.doctoral</dc:type> Cranfield: <dc:type>Thesis or dissertation</dc:type> <dc:type>Doctoral</dc:type> <dc:type>PhD</dc:type> Humboldt: <dc:type>Text</dc:type> <dc:type>dissertation</dc:type> Recommendation: use the following qualifications: “ info:eu-repo/semantics/ bachelorThesis ”, “ info:eu-repo/semantics/ masterThesis ”, “ info:eu-repo/semantics/ doctoralThesis ” (Bologna Convention)](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/2008-11-15-baltimore-driver-interoperability-bymauricevanderfeesten-090612054056-phpapp02/85/Driver-Guidelines-and-Repository-Interoperability-9-320.jpg)
Driver Guidelines and Repository Interoperability
- 1. Fasten … Seatbelt Maurice Vanderfeesten - SURFfoundation (NL) 15 November 2008 – Baltimore – DRIVER meeting
- 2. Fasten Excel in Scholarly communication
- 3. Seatbelt Get to the finish line safely
- 4. Innovation towards the intelligent web Reasoning Amount of data Productivity of Search Databases Web 1.0 1990 - 2000 PC Era 1980 - 1990 The World Wide Web The Desktop Keyword search Directories 2010 - 2020 2000 - 2010 2020 - 2030 Web 3.0 Web 4.0 Web 2.0 Natural language search Tagging Semantic Search The Semantic Web The Intelligent Web The Social Web Files & Folders By: Radar Networks / TWINE
- 5. Work together: Respect some rules
- 6. Global Digital Repository Infrastructure One goal: “Reliable Content Provision”
- 7. TICER 2008, Tilburg Wide spread metadata standards: Unqualified Dublin Core & OAI-PMH Problem: interpreting semantics; standard specifications not enough Example: Electronic theses need context specific descriptions for date, type, roles & language Reality: Efforts to interpret and normalize data
- 8. TICER 2008, Tilburg Trouble automatically interpreting semantics ex. [date] (Cranfield) Effort interpreting dates <dc:contributor>Partington, David(supervisor)</dc:contributor> <dc:creator>Lupson, Jonathan</dc:creator> <dc:date>2007-06-06T18:17:13Z</dc:date> <dc:date>2007-06-06T18:17:13Z</dc:date> <dc:date>2007-02</dc:date> <dc:identifier>http://hdl.handle.net/1826/1729</dc:identifier> <dc:description> (Publication?) (Graduation?) (Start ?) Humboldt: <dc:date>2007-06-07</dc:date> (Graduation) <dc:date>2007-03-06</dc:date> (Publication) <dc:date>2003-02</dc:date> (Start) Recommendation: in Unqualified Dublin Core use one date field that represents the Publication date!
- 9. TICER 2008, Tilburg Trouble automatically interpreting semantics ex. [type] Effort interpreting types DIVA: <dc:type>text.thesis.doctoral</dc:type> Cranfield: <dc:type>Thesis or dissertation</dc:type> <dc:type>Doctoral</dc:type> <dc:type>PhD</dc:type> Humboldt: <dc:type>Text</dc:type> <dc:type>dissertation</dc:type> Recommendation: use the following qualifications: “ info:eu-repo/semantics/ bachelorThesis ”, “ info:eu-repo/semantics/ masterThesis ”, “ info:eu-repo/semantics/ doctoralThesis ” (Bologna Convention)
- 10. TICER 2008, Tilburg Electronic theses need context specific descriptions Effort interpreting roles <dc:contributor>Partington, David(supervisor)</dc:contributor> <dc:creator>Lupson, Jonathan</dc:creator> <dc:date>2007-06-06T18:17:13Z</dc:date> <dc:date>2007-06-06T18:17:13Z</dc:date> <dc:date>2007-02</dc:date> <dc:identifier>http://hdl.handle.net/1826/1729</dc:identifier> <dc:description> Recommendation: use the contributor field in Dublin Core only for the person who supervised the Doctoral thesis project.
- 11. TICER 2008, Tilburg Personal notation flavour of a language Effort interpreting languages <dc:language>Nederlands</dc:language> <dc:language>ned</dc:language> <dc:language>nl</dc:language> <dc:language>nld/dut</dc:language> <dc:language>en_UK</dc:language> <dc:language>mn</dc:language> Recommendation: use ISO639-3 As a standard way of writing down a language in a repository
- 12. Number of repositories increase DRIVER: Collection of Quality Metadata for OpenAccess Material
- 13. All services providers must build adaptors for every single repository
- 14. Interoperability shares workload
- 15. Global Digital Repository Infrastructure One goal: “Reliable Content Provision”
- 16. Reliability: Broken Links Issue Repository URL
- 17. Reliability: Link resolvers Use ID’s for citation reference Obligation to update Technology independent (future proof) Repository Global Resolver OAI-PMH ID URL ID + URL Updates
- 18. Standards, Agreements, Rules: Interoperability guidelines
- 19. Towards web-reasoning: data efficiency & interoperability levels By: Andreas Tolk et al., "Composable M&S Web Services for Net-centric Applications," Journal for Defense Modeling & Simulation (JDMS), Volume 3 Number 1, pp. 27-44, January 2006
- 20. Interoperability leads towards improved retrieval and recall Reasoning Amount of data Productivity of Search Databases Web 1.0 1990 - 2000 PC Era 1980 - 1990 The World Wide Web The Desktop Keyword search Directories 2010 - 2020 2000 - 2010 2020 - 2030 Web 3.0 Web 4.0 Web 2.0 Natural language search Tagging Semantic Search The Semantic Web The Intelligent Web The Social Web Files & Folders By: Radar Networks / TWINE
- 21. We have: Tools for Syntactic & Semantic Interoperability Guidelines for content providers, exposing textual resources with OAI-PMH Validator, checking the rate of compliance to the “Guidelines for content providers”
- 23. Guidelines 2.0 Build on knowledge from past & current IR projects (EU) 26 actively involved contributors (experts and repository managers) from 8 countries. Practical answers for IR’s on how to: Improve full-text access Standardize metadata quality Create a reliable infrastructure for permanent identification, resolution, traceability and storage Resolve semantic and classification issues
- 24. Guidelines 2.0 - Chapters Use of OAI-PMH Use of Metadata OAI_DC Use of Best Practices for OAI_DC Use of Compound Object Wrapping Use of Vocabularies and Semantics Use of Quality labels (Long Term Preservation) Use of Persistent Identifiers Use of Usage Statistics Exchange Use of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR)
- 25. Validator
- 26. Validator Deep validation Experimental tool Self-test for Repository Managers Embedded in DRIVER registration process Detects interoperability issues Provides explanation per interoperability issue. Points to exact location of the issue for easy debugging Offers recommendations on how to correctly modify your repository to interoperable standards Creates a report for future reference Provides a weighted score for balanced effort Score influences the result list.
- 27. Looking back on what we have: Guidelines for content providers, exposing textual resources with OAI-PMH Validator, checking the rate of compliance to the “Guidelines for content providers”
- 28. What is missing? Guidelines
- 29. Trias Politica Model Legislative
- 30. We DON’T have A structure for acceptance of Repository Interoperability Guidelines World Wide Executive enforcement enabling action on adopting Interoperability Guidelines for Repositories, World Wide, on a National and local level Reasoning Amount of data Productivity of Search Databases Web 1.0 1990 - 2000 PC Era 1980 - 1990 The World Wide Web The Desktop Keyword search Directories 2010 - 2020 2000 - 2010 2020 - 2030 Web 3.0 Web 4.0 Web 2.0 Natural language search Tagging Semantic Search The Semantic Web The Intelligent Web The Social Web Files & Folders By: Radar Networks / TWINE
- 31. Questions What strategies can be used to create a global “Trias Politica” for repositories in order to enforce “reliable content provision” by using interoperability guidelines? What strategies are there to maintain repository guidelines? Who is responsible? What strategies are known to create an acceptance mechanism for global agreement to repository guidelines? What strategies can be used to enforce repository guidelines? Who is responsible for the (metadata) quality of the repository output?
- 32. The end Thank you Maurice Vanderfeesten www.SURFfoundation.nl vanderfeesten@surf.nl