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