• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Text to data
 

Text to data

on

  • 733 views

talk/ rant about Marc21 derived metadata

talk/ rant about Marc21 derived metadata

Statistics

Views

Total Views
733
Views on SlideShare
732
Embed Views
1

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

1 Embed 1

https://twitter.com 1

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • I’m trying to frame the next 40 minutes or so as a narrative
  • When attempting to guess where we are going, it helps if we take a step back1) To simplify things (a little) Librarians and cataloguers used to have full control of their data and the way it was used (consumed) - We created it (or paid others to do so for us) - Our readers consumed it, in our libraries, served via ledgers, card indexes and OPACs - We had / have policies + standards (AACR2, Marc21) procedures (LOC Authority control, organisation (RLUK, OCLC), technology (Z39.50, OPACS)
  • Library still in its bubbleAlternative discovery mechanisms and academic data & content sources suddenly existed alongside our sealed environment – all very heavily branded, very slick, constantly evolvingSome we pay for, some we contribute to, some we view as inferior competition – but they exist – all legitimate means to discover bibliographic material of interest to the researcher or the scholar and they act as a direct alternative to our traditional modelAll with their own data environments, standards, procedures, protocols – not necessarily oursIn light of this I argue that we could not longer maintain the closed ecosystem – to argue as such has become a fallacy, even in the mighty libraries of Oxford and Cambridge with world class special collections
  • 2) - We slowly lost our place as a single prime authority - for data- Commercial, social and academic discovery mechanisms Other sources of information for our users to turn toand eventually for content Also had to cope with a growth in digital content - Publishing shift to digital(took as while as journals came first, they were only a small part of our business - analytical cataloguing not standard practice) – this is resulting in massive changes in metadata and discovery usage …
  • In the new environment, come new users termed Generation Y. Generation Y, it is argued have grown up and worked outside of our bubble all along - used to a very different mode of consumption for data and resourcesThey are born between 1984 and 1990. but I would argue the concept can be stretched further, way back, probably anyone who has studied science since the mid to late 1990s …Cambridge Arcadia report 2009Preference for search engine over catalogueOnline over in-buildingTrust peers of librarianStill respect the library ‘brand’All of this has lead to a direct and open questioning of the purpose of the academic library – never mind the public one
  • Keyword based discovery servicesRich facetingGreater linkingNew ways to OPAC is dead? -it is in your case, and I’m quite jealous…All possible due to richness of data – our authority controlled catalogue records generally work quite well in faceted environments – we gain a competitive edge over folk whose data is not in such good shapeCatalogues are easier to pick up, easier to teach and provide a more cohesive experience, even if they don’t always work in the way we as Librarians would always like. Our data is still in use, it is valuable and relevant, partly as a result of these changes in interfaceAnd I know this, because when you launched Solo a couple of years ago, some of your undergrads became our post grads and told us what they thought of our interfaces
  • Catalogue data now goes through several processesThe record you create is not always the record readers will seeThe way it is searched and accessed Yet we still build it with the same rules and container formats as we did 20 years ago
  • Gets us so far. Need to move forward. One way to prepare is to open up. We need to share and open up our raw data and to make it easier for others to re-use. I would argue each of these groups has an equal right to our raw data as much as we do, each would have different use cases for itAnd by and large, in the field of online services, I’m talking about software developers but in many areasAllow others to innovate on our data on our behalf, think of those use cases and explore them.
  • And there is demand. This slide is based on the ideas of a certain Cambridge academic.Bibliographic data linked to many aspects of teaching and researchCitation lists – measure outputShared bibliography – core of research group workReading lists – backbone of undergraduate teachingQuality of data – in terms of consistency and accuracy and form we are much easier to handle than museums and archivesAll exists already, but not in an open, linked capacity that can be tied quickly and easily into other institutional and external services
  • This is recognised nationally by the JISC, who earlier this year launched the discovery initiativeOxford text archive contributed a project, we did with catalogue data and they are funding some very exciting work …

Text to data Text to data Presentation Transcript

  • + Text to data MashCat 2012 Ed Chamberlain
  • + Me  Librarian (systems)  Data ‘munger’  Data consumer?
  • + The way it used to be …  Control over record consumption  Control over record environment  Control over technology
  • +
  • + Competition … No longer the single authority for content and description Commercial, social and academic discovery mechanisms Explosion of digital content  Illusion of ‘all on the web’
  • + Fit for purpose?  Studies into Google Generation / ‘Generation Y’ 1  Cambridge Arcadia IRIS report 2009 2  Preference for search engine over catalogue  Online over in-building  Trust tutors and peers over Librarian 1) ”The Google generation: the information behaviour of the researcher of the future”  Still respect the library ‘brand’ Aslib Proceedings, V60, issue 4 10.1108/00012530810887953 2) Arcadia IRIS Project report - http://arcadiaproject.lib.cam.ac.uk/docs/Report_IRIS_final.pdf
  • + Improve catalogues  Keyword based discovery services  New ways to exploit old data  Relevancy ranking  Rich faceting  Greater linking  Search is the new browse  Repositories and archives  Is the OPAC dead?
  • + Different but the same? Catalogue data is now:  Consumed as keywords (not left anchored access points)  Faceted (not browsed)  Supplemented  Transformed  Merged  Amalgamated
  • + Prepare for the future …  „Use case you‟ve not yet thought of‟  „Consumer as producer‟  „Pro-Am‟  „Free from silo‟  Developers as well as readers  Preference for data over text
  • + Our local catalogues Research group website Wikipedia Web start-ups National / international aggregations Joe Public Library data Search engines Other Booksellers libraries Teenage software developer / hacker
  • + Libraries have a lot to offer  Bibliographic data linked to many aspects of successful teaching and research  Citation lists – measure output  Shared bibliography – core of research group work  Reading lists – backbone of undergraduate teaching  High quality data needed for re- use  Not all possible whilst data resides in the library ‘silo’
  • +  Open metadata creates the opportunity for enhancing impact through the release of descriptive data about library, archival and museum resources. It allows such data to be made freely available and innovatively reused to serve researchers, teachers, students, service providers and the wider community in the UK and internationally. http://discovery.ac.uk
  • + Open data releases …
  • + But …  Is Marc21 the right format for developers (or libraries?)  Is it easy to convert into something more palatable?
  • + What can we do with an ISBN?  Build Union catalogues  Find existing or alternative records (copy catalogue)  Find related works (XISBN, ISBNThing)  Match and mash with resources on the web:  Images  Reviews  Citations and references
  • + 020 - ISBN What cataloguer record users What data consumers want: want:  Accuracy – Accuracy  Contextualization – Contextualization  Access point – Access point  Something legible to read – Reusability – Granularity
  • + So …  Take ISBN from an 020$a  my $isbn = $record->field(020)->as_string("a");  0123456789(pbk)  (pbk) ?  Is it the same as (.pbk) I noticed earlier?  I‟m a developer – I can solve this …  Regex /^[0-9]+$/ - just gets numbers …  Oh hang on, don‟t some ISBNS end in X?  And all that information on hardback /paperback is lost …
  • + Non Marc …  <identifier type=“isbn” relation=“hardback”>0123456789x</isbn>  identifier: {"id": "0123456789", "type": "isbn”, “rel”:”hardback”}  <http://data.lib.cam.ac.uk/id/entry/cambrdgedb_100045> <http://purl.org/dc/terms/identifier >"urn:isbn:2853990060" .<http://data.lib.cam.ac.uk/id/type/46657eb180382684090fda2b56 70335d> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/Book.
  • + Advantages  Self describing (if you read English)  Granular  Data NOT text for display (although this can be easily generated)
  • + $100 … • 1001_ |a Greenwood, James, |d 1832-1929. • Greenwood, James, 1832-1929. "author" : [ { "birthDate" : "1832", "firstname" : " James", "deathDate" : "1929", "name" : "Greenwood, James", "lastname" : "Greenwood" } ]
  • my @exportAuthors=(); my @authors =();+ my $eachAuthor =; if ($record->field(100)) { @authors = $record->field(100); foreach $eachAuthor(@authors) { my %exportAuthor =(); my $authorFull = trim($eachAuthor->subfield(a)); $exportAuthor{name} = $authorFull; my @parsed_author=split(/,/, $authorFull); $exportAuthor{lastname} = $parsed_author[0]; $exportAuthor{firstname} = $parsed_author[1]; my $dates = $eachAuthor->subfield(d); my ($birthDate,$deathDate); # The glorious 100$d disassembled ... if ($dates) { #first of all, get rid of ca. and fl. which arent real birth or death dates if ($dates=~/fl.|ca./){ #do nothing } #otherwise, if date contains a hyphen, assume range #but fix also works for unterminated dates? elsif ($dates=~/-/) { my @dates=split(/-/,$dates); $exportAuthor{birthDate} = trim($dates[0]); if ($dates[1]) { $exportAuthor{deathDate} = trim($dates[1]); } #No Hyphen - assume single date - look for definitive birth event with a d ... } elsif ($dates=~/b./) { $exportAuthor{birthDate} = trim($dates[0]); # - look for definitive death event with a d ... } elsif ($dates=~/d./) { $exportAuthor{deathDate} = trim($dates[0]); # Final assumption for authors with recorded dates but with single date no hyphen. Assume its a birthdate? } else { $exportAuthor{birthDate} = trim($dates[0]); } # produce output for dates ... } # Assemble author object push(@exportAuthors,%exportAuthor); # End author loop } # Add list of authors to export object $exportRecord{author} = @exportAuthors; }
  • + How is this being solved?  Fix it at the source:  RDA  Marc transition initiative  Other initiatives – BL, OCLC linked data releases  Onyx  Mods
  • + Pragmatism: the end of big standards  Adoption of one new standard (or several) for its own sake is pointless  Fit in around changing needs of libraries and systems  Data needs to be flexible and re-purposable  No standard to „rule them all‟ in the post Marc21 world
  • + If we do nothing?