Metadata Cloud

Dr. Norm Friesen [email_address] Athabasca, AB 11/12/09 Metadata Possibilities: from the IEEE LOM through Dublin Core to …the “Cloud”? Photo: EssjayNZ

Overview
What is a standard & how can it be evaluated?
Standards to consider for metadata for online learning resources:
Learning Object Metadata (IEEE LOM)
Dublin Core
ISO/IEC JTC1 SC36 “Metadata for Learning Resources”
A case for a “new” approach

What is a standard?
"documented agreements containing technical specifications or other precise criteria to be used consistently as rules, guidelines, or definitions of characteristics, to ensure that materials, products, processes and services are fit for their purpose"
Fit for Purpose: discoverable, reusable, interoperable, adaptable, accessible
De facto / de jure standards: complex relationship
E.g. Dublin Core, folksonomies, etc.

Standards are “Living” Documents: They have a 5-7 Year Lifecycle

Three Standards for Educational & Generic Resource Metadata
IEEE Learning Object Metadata
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers; Standard released in 2002; renewed in 2009; CanCore as documentation
ISO Dublin Core (OCLC –Online Computer Library Centre)
American (ANSI/NISO) Standard in 2001 (Z39.85-2001)
ISO Standard 15836:2009
IETF RFC 5013 of August 2007
ISO/IEC JTC 1 Learning Resource Metadata (will be standardizing IMS Content Packaging and SCORM)
2009/09 (framework); 2010/03 (Dublin Core elements)

IEEE Learning Object Metadata
1484.12.3: Standard For Learning Technology-Extensible Markup Language (XML) Schema Definition Language Binding For Learning Object Metadata (2005)
“ On 13 May 2009, the IEEE-SA Standards Board approved the reaffirmation of LOM. That means that LOM has entered its second 5 year period of being an active standard.”

LOM Basics: 76 Elements
General (10)
Lifecycle (9)
Meta-metadata (10)
Educational (11)
Technical (12)
Rights (3)
Relation (7)
Annotation (4)
Classification (9)
2 types of elements:
Ones containing others
Ones containing data
6 types of data:
CharacterString
LangString (value, language indicator)
DateTime, Duration
Vocabulary
vCard

How elements & data work together
<general>
<identifier>
<catalog>CAREO</catalog>
<entry>632844</entry>
</identifier>
<identifier>
<catalog>URI</catalog>
<entry>http://www.pcc.edu/dl/idea.html</entry>
</identifier>
<title>
<string language="eng">Idea: The Inter…</string>
<string language="fra">Idea: la base… </string>
</title>

Complex structures: classification, lifecycle, technical
<contribute>
<role>
<source>LOMv1.0</source>
<value>editor</value>
</role>
<entity>
BEGIN:VCARD
VERSION:3.0
N:Smith;John;W.;Dr.;
FN:Dr. John W. Smith
ORG:Open Learning Agency
END:VCARD
</entity>
<date>
<dateTime>2003</dateTime>
</date>
</contribute>

How are these Elements used? International Survey from 2006
5 Sets of records varying in size from 75 to over 3000; 50 randomly selected from each (n=250):
ARIADNE Project (EU)
the LTSN (UK)
Metalab (France)
CELTS (China)
CAREO (Canada)

Frequency of Element Use

Frequency of Element Use
The most frequently used elements (not container elements; %-tage) :
Title, Description, Keyword
Format (e.g. .html, .jpg, .doc)
Language (human)
Author
Learning Resource Type (simulation, exercise, etc.)
Subject Classification (Purpose=Discipline)

How are used elements populated?
Contributor Types 
Info about contributors 

Conclusions: Elements and Values Selected Frequently
The LOM is used to describe intellectual content of resources:
General: Identifier, Title, Description, Keyword
LifeCycle.Contribute (role = Author and publisher)
Classification (Purpose=Discipline)
The LOM is used to describe file and media characteristics:
Technical.Format, Technical.Size, Location
Educational.Learning Resource Type (text, hypertext, notes, etc.)

Conclusions: Elements and Values Seldom Selected
LOM use does NOT emphasize description of an educational context or level:
Educational.Semantic Density 0%
Educational.Context <20%
EndUserRole 40%
LOM is NOT used to describe resources in terms of software objects:
Structure, Version (i.e. Alpha, Beta), Status <18%
Aggregation level <27%
Contribute.Role="terminator" “technical implementer/validator“ 0%

“ De facto status” of IEEE LOM

“ De facto status:” LOM vs DC

Criticisms
“ The “industrialist” Learning Objects approach has run out of steam” (OLCOS Roadmap, 2007)
Keep it simple (stupid!) E.g., see Wilson 2005:
notepad test - can you create a valid data instance in Notepad in less than 4k?
reading test: can you read and understand the basics of the specification in less than one hourr?
scripting test - can you script a simple client or service provider in one day?
Embed in html; realize value with small investment; compatible with “Web 2.0” technologies & practices (interactive information sharing; collaboration; distributed)

Dublin Core
ISO Standard 15836-2003 of February 2003
2 nd edition available as of 2009-02-18
ANSI/NISO Standard Z39.85-2007 of May 2007
IETF RFC 5013 of August 2007
OCLC
As a de facto standard?

15 Elements in the DCES
Contributor
Coverage
Creator
Date
Description
Format
Identifier
Language
Publisher
Relation
Rights
Source
Subject
Title
Type

Expressing Dublin Core Description Sets using XML (for title)
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?> <dcds:descriptionSet
xmlns:dcds="http://purl.org/dc/xmlns/2008/09/01/dc-ds-xml/">

<dcds:description>
<dcds:statement
dcds:propertyURI=“...dc/terms/title">
<dcds:literalValueString>DCMI Home Page
</dcds:literalValueString>
</dcds:statement>
</dcds:description>
</dcds:descriptionSet>

RDF: "The resource (example.org) has the subject 'Ornitology' from the vocab: …/taxonomy/MyVocab"
<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/" xmlns:ex="http://example.org/taxonomy/" xmlns:dcam="http://purl.org/dc/dcam/"> <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://example.org/123"> <dcterms:subject> <rdf:Description> <dcam:memberOf
rdf:resource="http://example.org/taxonomy/MyVocab"/> <rdf:value>Ornitology</rdf:value> </rdf:Description> </dcterms:subject> </rdf:Description> </rdf:RDF>

What does RDF in particular enable?
"a recommended best practice for exposing, sharing, and connecting pieces of data, information, and knowledge on the Semantic Web using URIs [Web addresses] and RDF."
“ The properties and classes of DCMI Metadata Terms have been defined for compatibility with Linked Data principles”
“ Over the past two years, vast amounts of commercial and public-sector data have been added to a growing to a linked data cloud.”

Courtesy Gilles Gauthier

E.g. Searching in Wikipedia vs. DBpedia
Wikipedia Article: Max Schreck
http://wiki.dbpedia.org/OnlineAccess#h28-3

DC: Levels of Interoperability
Level 1: Shared Term Definitions -based on shared natural-language definitions
Level 2: Formal Semantic Interop: based on the shared formal model via RDF & linked data
Level 3: Description Set Syntactic Interop: share abstract syntax for validatable metadata records
Level 4: Description Set Profile Interop: shared vocabularies & view of world

Metadata for Learning Resources
ISO/IEC 19788-1 ITLET – Metadata for Learning Resources –Part 1: Framework 2010-09
ISO/IEC 19788-2 ITLET – Metadata for Learning Resources – Part 2: Core Elements 2011-03
“ The DC-Education Community is working with the ISO Metadata for Learning Resources group to ensure compatibility of the DC-Education Application Profile Module and the ISO MLR-5: Educational Elements standard. We will be attending ISO MLR webconferences on 16 November 2009 and 18 December 2009, in preparation for the group's big meeting in Osaka in 2010.”

MLR – Characteristics
Multilingual capability: for element contents, for documentation and support
Accessibility: one part of the standard will be devoted to accessibility; accessibility experts have been providing input throughout
Compatibility: with the IEEE LOM (as an application profile), with Dublin Core (very directly), with Dublin Core RDF
Support: implementation guideline(s) planned

MLR Part 1 Courtesy Gilles Gauthier

MLR Part 2: Dublin Core Elements
“ This Part is provides full Dublin Core interoperability for this Standard. This is achieved through the description of each Dublin Core element using the MLR data element specification template provided in the MLR Part 1 Framework. In addition, Dublin Core definitions were reviewed in order to level out interpretation [and] ambiguity[,] and best practice guidance is provided in notes.”

How RDF works Oval = Resource (URI) Rectangle = Literal (String) Courtesy Gilles Gauthier

References
ISO SC36 Livelink: http://isotc.iso.org/livelink/livelink?func=ll&objId=806742
Dublin Core http://dublincore.org/
My blog: http://learningspaces.org/n/node/34

http://learningspaces.org	98
http://www.slideshare.net	7
http://normfriesen.info	3
http://cc.bingj.com	1

Metadata Cloud

by Norm Friesen on Nov 19, 2009

Accessibility

Categories

Tags

Upload Details

Usage Rights

4 Embeds 109

Statistics

Metadata Cloud — Webinar Transcript