• Like

The Other Side of Linked Open Data: Managing Metadata Aggregation

Uploaded on

Slides prepared for the ALCTS Metadata Interest Group at ALA Midwinter 2014.

Slides prepared for the ALCTS Metadata Interest Group at ALA Midwinter 2014.

More in: Technology
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads


Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds



Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

    No notes for slide
  • If LOD exists in multiple versions, and nobody uses it, does it make noise?
  • Evaluation using statistical analysis tool, from http://dcpapers.dublincore.org/pubs/article/view/744, Analyzing Metadata for Effective Use and Re-UseNaomi Dushay, Diane I. Hillmann
  • Revised diagram from: Orchestrating metadata enhancement services: Introducing LennyJon Phipps, Diane I. Hillmann, Gordon Paynter. Note that XForms in this context means ‘Transforms’—was well before an XForms standard that means something specific. http://dcpapers.dublincore.org/pubs/article/view/803


  • 1. The Other Side of Linked Data: Managing Metadata Aggregation ALCTS Metadata Interest Group ALA Midwinter 2014
  • 2. Where Are We Now? • Major projects so far focused on exposing selected portions of their data for ‘experimentation’ – Who’s using this data? – Can LOD for libraries succeed on that basis? • LOD is not just outputs, needs actual use to inform practice – A more complete view of the environment and workflow should help
  • 3. Outline • Limitations of the traditional database strategy – Including records, normalization, de-duplication, etc. • Components of a fuller view – – – – – Workflow Inputs, outputs Data cache and services Need for automated orchestration The maintenance conundrum
  • 4. Substituting a Cache for a Database • Supports multiple streams of data • Allows detailed provenance to be carried over time • Separates services from data storage • Allows more extensive automation (and orchestration of services) • Focuses valuable human effort where it’s needed: analysis, design and implementation of improvement services
  • 5. Workflow • • • • Obtain data (possibly as ‘records’) Store data as statements in cache Evaluate data by source or collection Improve data using specific services, as determined by evaluation • Publish improved data • [Rinse, repeat]
  • 6. Yellow=Data we use now Green=Data we’re adding
  • 7. Yellow=Data we share now Orange=Data we propose to share Green=Data categories we can share
  • 8. Developing and Defining Services • Small single purpose services are easier to develop and maintain – What services you need are determined by goals, evaluation results, etc. – ‘Orchestration’ of services applies them to specific kinds of data, in order – Services can be described, and linked, to expose who, what, when and how to downstream users
  • 9. Developing Automated Interaction • Rule: Use humans for things requiring human understanding and decision making – Use machines for everything else – A manual process for something a machine can do as well or better is a failure • Improvement services can be granular, invoked in prescribed order, and report results for later use – Continuous improvement necessary to respond to continuous change
  • 10. Data Maintenance • Improved data returns as statements to the data cache, with provenance attached • Statement strategy avoids overwriting of new data over ‘improved’ data • Each new statement adds to what is known about a described resource • Statements can be cherry picked and exposed to others in statements or records, in ‘flavors’ or as a ‘everything we have’
  • 11. Contact Information Diane Hillmann metadata.maven@gmail.com Gordon Dunsire gordon@gordondunsire.com Jon Phipps jonphipps@gmail.com The First MetadataMobile