Successfully reported this slideshow.
Your SlideShare is downloading. ×

Resource Discovery Landscape

Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Ad
Upcoming SlideShare
Tutorial Linked APIs
Tutorial Linked APIs
Loading in …3
×

Check these out next

1 of 30 Ad
Advertisement

More Related Content

Slideshows for you (20)

Advertisement

Similar to Resource Discovery Landscape (20)

More from Andy Powell (20)

Advertisement

Resource Discovery Landscape

  1. 1. UKOLN is supported by: Resource Discovery Landscape Andy Powell, UKOLN, University of Bath [email_address] Joint JIIE/JCS Meeting 2005, London www.bath.ac.uk a centre of expertise in digital information management www.ukoln.ac.uk
  2. 2. Contents <ul><li>general issues </li></ul><ul><li>provision </li></ul><ul><li>fusion </li></ul><ul><li>presentation </li></ul><ul><li>shared infrastructure </li></ul>Based on main headings in the study…
  3. 3. JISC IE and Google <ul><li>previous paper considered relationships between JISC IE and Google: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>complimentary rather than alternative approaches </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>develop guidance for exposing content to Google </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>investigate use of Google APIs </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>special treatment for community’s ‘high-quality’ material – c.f. Google Scholar </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>encouraging use of OpenURLs by academic and commercial content providers </li></ul></ul>http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/distributed-systems/jisc-ie/arch/ie-google/
  4. 4. General issues <ul><li>service oriented ‘frameworks’ </li></ul><ul><li>maturity of the JISC IE </li></ul><ul><li>manual vs. automated approaches </li></ul><ul><li>semantic Web </li></ul><ul><li>community-driven activities </li></ul><ul><li>p2p </li></ul>
  5. 5. General issues <ul><li>service oriented approaches </li></ul><ul><li>maturity of the JISC IE </li></ul><ul><li>manual vs. automated approaches </li></ul><ul><li>semantic Web </li></ul><ul><li>community-driven activities </li></ul><ul><li>p2p </li></ul>
  6. 6. General issues <ul><li>service oriented approaches </li></ul><ul><li>maturity of the JISC IE </li></ul><ul><li>manual vs. automated approaches </li></ul><ul><li>semantic Web </li></ul><ul><li>community-driven activities </li></ul><ul><li>p2p </li></ul>
  7. 7. General issues <ul><li>service oriented approaches </li></ul><ul><li>maturity of the JISC IE </li></ul><ul><li>manual vs. automated approaches </li></ul><ul><li>semantic Web </li></ul><ul><li>community-driven activities </li></ul><ul><li>p2p </li></ul>
  8. 8. General issues <ul><li>service oriented approaches </li></ul><ul><li>maturity of the JISC IE </li></ul><ul><li>manual vs. automated approaches </li></ul><ul><li>semantic Web </li></ul><ul><li>community-driven activities </li></ul><ul><li>p2p </li></ul>
  9. 9. General issues <ul><li>service oriented approaches </li></ul><ul><li>maturity of the JISC IE </li></ul><ul><li>manual vs. automated approaches </li></ul><ul><li>semantic Web </li></ul><ul><li>community-driven activities </li></ul><ul><li>p2p </li></ul>
  10. 10. Provision layer issues <ul><li>the ‘R’ word </li></ul><ul><li>complex objects </li></ul><ul><li>metasearch vs. full-text indexing </li></ul><ul><li>simple search interfaces </li></ul><ul><li>identifiers </li></ul>repository eprint archive learning object repository CMS
  11. 11. Provision layer issues <ul><li>the ‘R’ word </li></ul><ul><li>complex objects </li></ul><ul><li>metasearch vs. full-text indexing </li></ul><ul><li>simple search interfaces </li></ul><ul><li>identifiers </li></ul>eprint (work) PDF manifestation PDF (manifestation) MS-Word (manifestation) PDF (manifestation) MS-Word (manifestation) eprint (work) now: expose separate simple objects (metadata only) future: expose complex objects (metadata and full text)
  12. 12. Provision layer issues <ul><li>the ‘R’ word </li></ul><ul><li>complex objects </li></ul><ul><li>metasearch vs. full-text indexing </li></ul><ul><li>simple search interfaces </li></ul><ul><li>identifiers </li></ul>Do I make my content available for indexing by Google or do I make my metadata available for harvesting using OAI-PMH? Do I support Z39.50 or SRW? What do I do about OpenURLs?
  13. 13. Provision layer issues <ul><li>the ‘R’ word </li></ul><ul><li>complex objects </li></ul><ul><li>metasearch vs. full-text indexing </li></ul><ul><li>simple of search interfaces </li></ul><ul><li>identifiers </li></ul>Z39.50 SRW Google API A9 Opensearch complexity
  14. 14. Provision layer issues <ul><li>the ‘R’ word </li></ul><ul><li>complex objects </li></ul><ul><li>metasearch vs. full-text indexing </li></ul><ul><li>simple search interfaces </li></ul><ul><li>identifiers </li></ul>What did this identifier used to identify? Has this resource already been assigned an identifier? How do I resolve this identifier?
  15. 15. Fusion layer issues <ul><li>union catalogues and Google </li></ul><ul><li>indexing and data mining </li></ul><ul><li>hiding a complex provision layer </li></ul><ul><li>performance measurement </li></ul>
  16. 16. Fusion layer issues <ul><li>union catalogues and Google </li></ul><ul><li>indexing and data mining </li></ul><ul><li>hiding a complex provision layer </li></ul><ul><li>performance measurement </li></ul>
  17. 17. Fusion layer issues <ul><li>union catalogues and Google </li></ul><ul><li>indexing and data mining </li></ul><ul><li>hiding a complex provision layer </li></ul><ul><li>performance measurement </li></ul>fusion layer ‘federator’ repository repository repository repository repository portal portal portal portal portal heterogeneous - metadata formats, content formats, identifiers, packaging standards homogeneous - metadata formats, content formats, identifiers, packaging standards
  18. 18. Fusion layer issues <ul><li>union catalogues and Google </li></ul><ul><li>indexing and data mining </li></ul><ul><li>hiding a complex provision layer </li></ul><ul><li>performance measurement </li></ul>
  19. 19. Presentation layer issues <ul><li>the ‘P’ word </li></ul><ul><li>the other ‘P’ word </li></ul><ul><li>OpenURL ‘link servers’ </li></ul><ul><ul><li>making openurl.ac.uk work globally </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>making OpenURLs work as URIs </li></ul></ul>Why do I need a portal when I’ve got Firefox, Google and my favourite RSS channel reader installed on my desktop?
  20. 20. Presentation layer issues <ul><li>the ‘P’ word </li></ul><ul><li>the other ‘P’ word </li></ul><ul><li>OpenURL ‘link servers’ </li></ul><ul><ul><li>making openurl.ac.uk work globally </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>making OpenURLs work as URIs </li></ul></ul>> portlets WSRP JSR 168
  21. 21. Presentation layer issues <ul><li>the ‘P’ word </li></ul><ul><li>the other ‘P’ word </li></ul><ul><li>OpenURL ‘link servers’ </li></ul><ul><ul><li>making openurl.ac.uk work globally </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>making OpenURLs work as URIs </li></ul></ul>http://sfx4.exlibrisgroup.com:9003/bath?sid=ISI%3AWoS &issn=0213-3911&date=2005&spage=575&volume=20&issue=2 http://openurl.ac.uk/?sid=ISI%3AWoS &issn=0213-3911&date=2005&spage=575&volume=20&issue=2 http://???/?sid=ISI%3AWoS &issn=0213-3911&date=2005&spage=575&volume=20&issue=2 works for member of University of Bath works for member of UK university works for everyone
  22. 22. Shared services issues <ul><li>distributed service registries </li></ul><ul><li>metadata schema registries </li></ul><ul><li>identifier services </li></ul><ul><li>terminology services </li></ul><ul><li>licensing services </li></ul><ul><ul><li>who’s using what licences? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>ensuing persistence of licensing agreements? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>automated metadata-generation tools </li></ul><ul><li>name authority services </li></ul>Note: I’m not going to talk about AAA
  23. 23. Shared services issues <ul><li>distributed service registries </li></ul><ul><li>metadata schema registries </li></ul><ul><li>identifier services </li></ul><ul><li>terminology services </li></ul><ul><li>licensing services </li></ul><ul><ul><li>who’s using what licences? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>ensuing persistence of licensing agreements? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>automated metadata-generation tools </li></ul><ul><li>name authority services </li></ul>
  24. 24. Shared services issues <ul><li>distributed service registries </li></ul><ul><li>metadata schema registries </li></ul><ul><li>identifier services </li></ul><ul><li>terminology services </li></ul><ul><li>licensing services </li></ul><ul><ul><li>who’s using what licences? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>ensuing persistence of licensing agreements? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>automated metadata-generation tools </li></ul><ul><li>name authority services </li></ul>
  25. 25. Shared services issues <ul><li>distributed service registries </li></ul><ul><li>metadata schema registries </li></ul><ul><li>identifier services </li></ul><ul><li>terminology services </li></ul><ul><li>licensing services </li></ul><ul><ul><li>who’s using what licences? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>ensuing persistence of licensing agreements? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>automated metadata-generation tools </li></ul><ul><li>name authority services </li></ul>
  26. 26. Shared services issues <ul><li>distributed service registries </li></ul><ul><li>metadata schema registries </li></ul><ul><li>identifier services </li></ul><ul><li>terminology services </li></ul><ul><li>licensing services </li></ul><ul><ul><li>who’s using what licences? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>ensuing persistence of licensing agreements? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>automated metadata-generation tools </li></ul><ul><li>name authority services </li></ul>
  27. 27. Shared services issues <ul><li>distributed service registries </li></ul><ul><li>metadata schema registries </li></ul><ul><li>identifier services </li></ul><ul><li>terminology services </li></ul><ul><li>licensing services </li></ul><ul><ul><li>who’s using what licences? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>ensuing persistence of licensing agreements? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>automated metadata-generation tools </li></ul><ul><li>name authority services </li></ul>
  28. 28. Shared services issues <ul><li>distributed service registries </li></ul><ul><li>metadata schema registries </li></ul><ul><li>identifier services </li></ul><ul><li>terminology services </li></ul><ul><li>licensing services </li></ul><ul><ul><li>who’s using what licences? </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>ensuing persistence of licensing agreements? </li></ul></ul><ul><li>automated metadata-generation tools </li></ul><ul><li>name authority services </li></ul>
  29. 29. Conclusions <ul><li>the study makes 26 suggestions – too many to consider here – but general need to recognise that… </li></ul><ul><ul><li>our services are not (and will never be) the sole focus of the end-user’s attention </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>our services fit into broader fabric of the Internet – therefore need to be able to be integrated by others </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>some things are better done by others </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>possible tension between Web-based ‘portal and browser ‘desktop application framework’ approaches </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>need to align eLeaning and ‘digital library’ </li></ul></ul>
  30. 30. Questions?

×