Developments in Metadata Interoperability: Museums and Localisation Industry paradigms - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – Developments in Metadata Interoperability: Museums and Localisation Industry paradigms PowerPoint presentation | free to view - id: 1eec47-ZDc1Z



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

Developments in Metadata Interoperability: Museums and Localisation Industry paradigms

Description:

Data compatible with existing records in online library catalogues ... and maintained by the Library of Congress Network Development and MARC Standards ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:58
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 23
Provided by: dimitri55
Category:

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Developments in Metadata Interoperability: Museums and Localisation Industry paradigms


1
Developments in Metadata Interoperability
Museums and Localisation Industry paradigms
  • Dr. George N. Kordelis

2
Overview
  • Metadata interoperability issue
  • Museums metadata paradigm
  • RDA, working on the global metadata standard
  • Localisation paradigm (as a business metadata
    example)
  • The XLIFF standard and its potential application
    as localisation metadata standard to all other
    formats.
  • Summary

3
Metadata interoperability issue (I) The problem
space
  • Various metadata schemes and element sets
  • Other are well known documented
  • Other are less known and used in special cases
  • Similar or the same content is described by
    different metadata standards
  • No canonical metadata record for an object
  • Varied syntaxes for encoding metadata
  • This situation leads to
  • A very rich and diverse metadata ecology!
  • Problems in a networked environment

4
Metadata interoperability issue (II)The problem
space
  • In a networked environment
  • Interaction between systems during harvesting and
    searching
  • Integrating different types of metadata even for
    local information management (i.e. inside a
    library or a museums LAN)
  • Interoperability
  • "Interoperability is the ability of multiple
    systems with different hardware and software
    platforms, data structures, and interfaces to
    exchange data with minimal loss of content and
    functionality" NISO, 2004.
  • "Interoperability is the ability of two or more
    systems or components to exchange information and
    use the exchanged information without special
    effort on either system" CCDA, 2000.

5
Metadata interoperability issue (III)Solutions
  • Schema level Efforts are focused on the
    elements of the schemata, being independent of
    any application.
  • Derivation (e.g. MARC? MARCXML, MARCLite, MODS) -
    Application Profiles - Crosswalks (absolute and
    relative) - Switching-across - Metadata Registry
  • Record level Efforts are intended to integrate
    populated metadata records through the mapping of
    the elements according to the semantic meanings
    of these elements.
  • Conversion of Metadata Records (e.g. MARC ??MODS)
    - Data Reuse and Integration (e.g. Resource
    Description Framework -RDF)
  • Repository level With harvested or integrated
    records from varying sources, efforts at this
    level focus on mapping value strings associated
    with particular elements (e.g., terms associated
    with subject or format elements). The results
    enable cross-collection searching.
  • Metadata Repository Based on the Open Archives
    Initiative (OAI) Protocol - Metadata Repository
    Supporting Multiple Formats Without Record
    Conversion - Aggregation

6
Museums metadata paradigm(I)
  • Descriptive or Content metadata in Museum
  • Museum Collections Management/Documentation
    Standards
  • CHIN Data Dictionaries
  • SPECTRUM (Standard ProcEdures for CollecTions
    Recording Used in Museums)
  • CIDOC Guidelines for Museum Object Information
    The CIDOC Information Categories
  • Collections Description Standards
  • Collection-level description
  • RSLP Standard for Collection-level description
    (based on DC)
  • Description of Art Collections and/or Visual
    Resources
  • Categories for the Description of Works of Art
    (CDWA)
  • VRA Core Categories
  • Méthode d'inventaire informatique des objets
    beaux-arts et arts décoratifs
  • RLG REACH Element Set
  • Le catalogage des estampes
  • Description of Architecture, Archaeological
    Sites/Monuments
  • A Guide to the Description of Architectural
    Drawings
  • CIDOC International Core Data Standard for
    Archaeological Sites and Monuments
  • CIDOC International Core Data Standard for
    Archaeological Objects
  • MIDAS (Monument Inventory Data Standard)

7
Museums metadata paradigm(II)
  • General Metadata Standards for Resource Discovery
  • Dublin Core, The Dublin Core Metadata Element Set
  • Museum use a discipline-specific standard (CHIN
    Data Dictionaries or SPECTRUM) in order to
    document and manage their collections, and
    extract a subset of their collections records
    which map to the Dublin Core Elements.
  • Darwin Core
  • Darwin Core (DwC) is a "profile describing the
    minimum set of standards for search and retrieval
    of natural history collections and observation
    databases".
  • Multimedia Metadata Standards (NISO NISO
    Z39.87-2002 Technical Metadata for Digital Still
    Images, DIG35 Specification, MPEG-7, Video
    Development Initiative (ViDe) User's Guide
    Dublin Core Application Profile for Digital
    Video)
  • Metadata Standards for Digital Preservation RLG
    Preservation Metadata Elements, Metadata for
    Long-Term Preservation, Metadata Encoding and
    Transmission Standard (METS)
  • Intellectual Property Rights and Electronic
    Commerce Standards (NDECS (Interoperatibility of
    Data for Electronic Commerce Systems), MPEG-21,
    Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

Metadata interoperability problem exists in a
Museums Environment
8
Museums metadata crosswalks
  • Museums and the Network Why
  • Museums that want to convert their data from one
    format to another (for example, moving data into
    a new collections management system)
  • Museums that want to exchange data with another
    organization using a different metadata standard
  • Several museums that wish to collaborate to
    create a collective or distributed resource that
    allows seamless searching by users
  • Museums using internally more than one standard
    to meet their various needs for documentation,
    management, security, and access
  • Implemented Solutions Crosswalk of Metadata
    Element Sets
  • The Getty Research Institute "Crosswalk of
    Metadata Element Sets for Art, Architecture, and
    Cultural Heritage Information and Online
    Resources".
  • CHIN Humanities Data Dictionary

9
RDA Resource Description and Access
  • Joint Steering Committee for Revision of AACR
    (JSC) is working towards a new standard RDA
    Resource Description and Access, scheduled for
    release in early 2009.
  • RDA is a new standard for resource description
    and access, designed for the digital environment
  • A flexible framework for describing all resources
    - analog and digital
  • Data readily adaptable to new and emerging
    database structures
  • Data compatible with existing records in online
    library catalogues
  • Globalizable and Localizable content standard
    covering all media
  • Independent of technical communication formats
  • Aimed at everybody who needs to find, identify,
    select, obtain, use, manage and organize
    information
  • RDA and other standards
  • RDA/ONIX framework for resource categorization
  • RDA/MARC21 mapping
  • RDA/Dublin Core mapping

http//www.collectionscanada.ca/jsc/rda.html
10
Localisation paradigm (as a business metadata
example)XML Localization Interchange File Format
  • OASIS-XLIFF (Organization for the Advancement of
    Structured Information Standards - XML
    Localization Interchange File Format) has emerged
    as a standard interchange file format for
    localization-related data and metadata.
  • Localization challenges
  • Insufficient interoperability between tools.
  • Lack of support for overall localization
    workflow.
  • Localization tools developers and users need to
    deal with various formats.
  • Large number of proprietary intermediate formats.

11
Localisation paradigm (as a business metadata
example)XML Localization Interchange File Format
  • XLIFF Advantages Localization Customer, Tools
    Vendor, Service Provider
  • Single format for adjunct processing (e.g.
    quality control in terms of spell checking).
  • Less dependency on vendors which are able to work
    with special formats.
  • Tighter control on what goes to localization
    (Pre-filtering of what to translate or not).
  • Controlled information flow (author/developer
    notes, item properties, etc.).
  • All advantages of XML-based processing (e.g.
    ID-based leveraging)
  • Focus on development of core functionality rather
    treatment of source format.
  • Open and standard solution for proprietary
    formats.
  • Global implementation of utilities (e.g. one
    spell checker for both RTF and HTML).

12
The High Level View
  • An XLIFF document can capture anything needed for
    a localization project
  • Localizable objects (e.g. text strings) in source
    and target languages.
  • Supplementary information (e.g. glossaries, or
    material to recreate the original format).
  • Administrative information (e.g. workflow data).
  • Custom data (e.g. initialization information for
    tools).

13
The XLIFF Document
  • An XLIFF document is designed to store the
    extracted data related to localization.
  • Each given source container (e.g. a file, a
    database table, and so forth) corresponds to a
    ltfilegt element in XLIFF.
  • Each XLIFF document can include several ltfilegt
    elements.
  • A whole localization project can possibly be
    stored in a single XLIFF document.

14
Bilingual Model
  • Each ltfilegt element is designed to store one
    source language and one target language.
  • The rationale is that the translation for every
    target language is done by different people most
    of the time.
  • However, languages in ltalt-transgt element can be
    different. For example, proposed matches in
    national Portuguese when translating into
    Brazilian Portuguese.

15
Localizable Objects
  • XLIFF allows not only text string localization
    but also localization of other object types such
    as graphics.
  • Supplementary information can be represented in a
    generic way through inline codes (e.g. formatting
    of text).
  • Relationship between objects can be captured
    (e.g. all items in a menu).

16
An XLIFF Snippet
  • A simple menu represented as XLIFF

17
Content Creators
Localisation Domain
Publisher/ Customer Domain
18
- OR -
Localisation Domain
Publisher/ Customer Domain
19
  • The needs of local communities often conflict
    with the goal of effective cross-searching and
    retrieval of information.
  • Metadata interoperability becomes top priority in
    a networked information environment.
  • Many methods and techniques have already been
    developed by various Organizations to overcome
    the problem.
  • A common global standard, such as RDA, can offer
    solutions.
  • Localisation Industry has already realized the
    advantages of a common localisation metadata
    standard, through the development of XLIFF.

20
References
  • RDA (Research Description and Access) is
    available at www.collectionscanada.ca/jsc/news.htm
    l
  • The XLIFF (XML Localisation Interchange File
    Format) TC Web Site http//www.xliff.org
  • Metadata Interoperability and Standardization A
    Study of Methodology Part I and II, Lois Mai
    Chan, Marcia Lei Zeng , D-Lib Magazine, June
    2006, Volume 12 Number 6 (available in
    http//www.dlib.org/dlib/june06/chan/06chan.html)
  • NISO 2004 NISO (National Information Standards
    Organization). (2004). Understanding metadata.
    Bethesda, MD NISO Press. Available
    lthttp//www.niso.org/standards/resources
    /UnderstandingMetadata.pdfgt.
  • CCDA, 2000 CCDA (ALCTS/CCS/Committee on
    Cataloging Description and Access). (2000). Task
    Force on Metadata Final report, June 16, 2000.
    Available lthttp//www.libraries.psu.edu/tas/jca/c
    cda/tf-meta6.htmlgt.
  • Taylor 2004, p. 369 Taylor, A. (2004). The
    Organization of Information. 2nd ed. Westport,
    CN Libraries Unlimited.
  • MARC (MAchine-Readable Cataloging) Formats
    http//lcweb.loc.gov/marc/ Developed and
    maintained by the Library of Congress Network
    Development and MARC Standards Office.
  • MODS (Metadata Object Description Schema)
    http//www.loc.gov/standards/mods/ Developed and
    maintained by the Library of Congress Network
    Development and MARC Standards Office.
  • RDF DuCharme, B. (2003). Building Metadata
    Applications with RDF. XML.com. Available
    lthttp//www.xml.com/pub/a/2003/02/12/rdflib.htmlgt.
  • METS (Metadata Encoding and Transmission
    Standard) http//www.loc.gov/mets Developed as an
    initiative of the Digital Library Federation
    maintained in the Network Development and MARC
    Standards Office of the Library of Congress.

21
References
  • MARCLite, http//www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/li
    te/ Developed and maintained by the Library of
    Congress Network Development and MARC Standards
    Office. A subset of the data elements in the
    complete MARC 21 Format for Bibliographic Data.
  • MARCXML, http//www.loc.gov/marcxml , Developed
    and maintained by the Library of Congress Network
    Development and MARC Standards Office. A
    framework for working with MARC data in a XML
    environment.
  • GEM (The Gateway to Educational Materials)
    Element Set, http//www.thegateway.org/about/docum
    entation/schemas, Maintained by the GEM
    Consortium. A set of metadata elements based on
    the Dublin Core used by GEM members to organize
    and improve access to their own educational
    materials.
  • ETD-MS an Interoperability Metadata Standard for
    Electronic Theses and Dissertations,
    http//www.ndltd.org/standards/metadata/current.ht
    ml, Developed by the Networked Digital Library of
    Theses and Dissertations (NDLTD). A standard set
    of metadata elements based on the Dublin Core
    used to describe electronic theses and
    dissertations.
  • CHIN Canadian Heritage Information Network,
    http//www.chin.gc.ca/English/index.html
  • SPECTRUM Standard ProcEdures for CollecTions
    Recording Used in Museums, The UK Museum
    Documentation Standard. 1997-2002,
    www.mda.org.uk/spectrum.htm
  • ICOM-CIDOC The International Committee for
    Documentation of the International Council of
    Museums, http//www.willpowerinfo.myby.co.uk/cidoc
    /
  • RSLP (Research Support Libraries Programme in UK)
    , Standard for Collection-level description,
    http//www.ukoln.ac.uk/metadata/rslp/

22
References
  • CDWA, Categories for the Description of Works of
    Art, http//www.getty.edu/research/conducting_rese
    arch/standards/cdwa/introduction.html
  • VRA (Visual Resources Association) Core
    Categories, http//www.vraweb.org/
  • RLG (Research Libraries Group) REACH Element Set,
    http//www.rlg.org/reach.elements.html
  • MIDAS (Monument Inventory Data Standard),
    http//www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/filearea.cgi?LMG
    T1FISHagetf/web_midasintro.htm
  • Darwin Core , http//speciesanalyst.net/docs/dwc/i
    ndex.html
  • Getty Research Institute "Crosswalk of Metadata
    Element Sets for Art, Architecture, and Cultural
    Heritage Information and Online Resources,
    http//www.getty.edu/research/conducting_research/
    standards/index.html
About PowerShow.com