D2.5 Object model and metadata: Open issues

1,423 views

Published on

D2.5 Object model and metadata: Open issues

Published in: Education, Technology
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,423
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
9
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

D2.5 Object model and metadata: Open issues

  1. 1. [D2.5] Object model and metadata: Open issues Workgroups Kick-off meeting – 2 & 3 April 2009 Julie Verleyen
  2. 2. Open issues [1/2] <ul><li>Objects and their surrogates </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Which types of objects? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Which relations? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Object description </li></ul><ul><ul><li>How are object types described? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>How to improve ingestion of existing descriptions  surrogate model? How to improve existing descriptions? </li></ul></ul>
  3. 3. Open issues [2/2] <ul><li>Other Surrogate Elements </li></ul><ul><ul><li>What kind of abstractions do we receive from content providers? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>What kind of abstractions do we need to produce? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>How do we get use/access license info? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Annotations </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Required cross-domain functionalities </li></ul>
  4. 4. Europeana prototype experience <ul><li>Illustration of issues through real-world examples: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Types of objects </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Relation between object types </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Objects descriptions </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Abstractions </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Access/use license info </li></ul></ul>
  5. 5. 1. Types of objects <ul><li>“ DIGITISED OBJECTS” </li></ul><ul><li>Typically: metadata describing an object which is the result of the digitisation process from all domains </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Maps </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Novels </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Newspapers </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Videos </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Paintings </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Music sheets </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Theses </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Postcards </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Photographic plates </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Historical, art, archeological, decorative items </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Poems </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>TV programs </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Audio recordings </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Music instruments </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Letters </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Atlasses </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Posters </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Etc…etc… </li></ul></ul>
  6. 8. 1. Types of objects <ul><li>“ MIXED OBJECTS” </li></ul><ul><li>Metadata related to digitised objects and physical objects are mixed </li></ul>
  7. 9. Digital Object metadata Physical Object metadata
  8. 10. 1. Types of objects <ul><li>“ DIGITAL BORN OBJECT” </li></ul><ul><li>Not many + Difficult to identify… </li></ul>
  9. 13. 1. Types of objects <ul><li>“ HIERARCHICAL OBJECT” </li></ul><ul><li>Case of archival material with problem of granularity </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Ex: “Archim” collection </li></ul></ul>
  10. 17. 2. Relations between objects <ul><li>At the moment: “Related items” </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Automatic terms extraction from title , description , creator , what , when , who fields + weighting parameters  new search  related items </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Not always straightforward: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Ex: <dc:relation> </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Ex: Find the differences!!.... </li></ul></ul>
  11. 18. 2. Relation between object types
  12. 23. 3. Objects descriptions <ul><li>Schemas dealt with so far : </li></ul><ul><ul><li>dc, qdc, dc-based (tel, oai_va, …), ead, museumdat, local (pico, ), ese </li></ul></ul><ul><li>More are available (mods, mets, other local flavours, etc…) but were not exploited </li></ul><ul><li>Metadata (fields & values) in different languages </li></ul>
  13. 24. Collect Britain local Scran local Icelandic maps dc CIMEC ese Maps NL Archive ead NO Museums museumdat
  14. 25. 4. Abstractions <ul><li>Footage of video, thumbnails, table of contents….? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Thumbnails (were requested) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>TOC </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Ex: Hungarian Electronic Library: <dc:description> </li></ul></ul></ul>
  15. 28. 5. Access/use license info <ul><li>Analysis of metadata: </li></ul><ul><ul><li><dc:rights> field: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Ex: Italian collection of digitised books: </li></ul></ul></ul>
  16. 31. 5. Access/use license info <ul><li>Analysis of metadata: </li></ul><ul><ul><li><dc:rights> field: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Ex: Italian collection of digitised books: </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li><setSpec> field (OAI-PMH header): </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Ex: Polish “Digital Polona” collection </li></ul></ul></ul>
  17. 34. 5. Access/use license info <ul><li>Analysis of metadata: </li></ul><ul><ul><li><dc:rights> field: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Ex: Italian collection of digitised books: </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li><setSpec> field (OAI-PMH header): </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Ex: Polish “Digital Polona” collection </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Multilingual challenge: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Ex: Estonian “DIGAR” collection </li></ul></ul></ul>
  18. 37. 5. Access/use license info <ul><li>Analysis of metadata: </li></ul><ul><ul><li><dc:rights> field: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Ex: Italian collection of digitised books: </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li><setSpec> field (OAI-PMH header): </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Ex: Polish “Digital Polona” collection </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Multilingual challenge: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Ex: Estonian “DIGAR” collection </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Provided info is often not enough (intellectual property doesn’t indicate access status) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Test search in the portal: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Ex: search on “Picasso” </li></ul></ul></ul>
  19. 40. http://216.139.227.103/CorexDoc/RMN/Media/TR1/ZE9CA/95-024000.jpg
  20. 41. Picasso family rights + rights of photograph
  21. 42. 6. Foreseen issues related to copyright <ul><li>Case of 2 images (different resolutions) of physical object provided by 2 different institutions. </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Example: : </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Image of painting provided by Museum </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Another image of same painting provided by Reproduction agency </li></ul></ul></ul>
  22. 43. <end> Julie Verleyen Workgroups Kick-off meeting – 2 & 3 April 2009

×