Best Practices for Descriptive Metadata for Web ArchivingOCLC
Web archiving has become imperative to ensure that our digital heritage does not disappear forever, yet many institutions have not begun this work. In addition, archived websites are not easily discoverable, which severely limits their use. To address this challenge, OCLC Research has established the OCLC Research Library Partnership Web Archiving Metadata Working Group to develop a data dictionary that will be compatible with library and archives standards. Three reports on this project are available in late 2017, focused on metadata best practices guidelines, user needs and behaviors, and evaluation of web archiving tools.
Libraries, collections, technology: presented at Pennylvania State University...lisld
Library collections are changing in a network environment. This presentation considers how collections are being reconfigured, it looks at research support services, and it explores the shift from the purchased/licensed collection to the facilitated collection.
Keynote presented at the International Association of University Libraries Conference (IATUL), 20 June 2017 in Bolzano, Italy.
Library metadata was created to describe objects and enable a reader to understand when they had the same or a different object in hand. Now linked data concepts and techniques are allowing us to recreate, merge, and link our metadata assets in new ways that better support discovery - both in our local systems and on the wider web. Tennant described this migration and the potential it has for solving key discovery problems.
Best Practices for Descriptive Metadata for Web ArchivingOCLC
Web archiving has become imperative to ensure that our digital heritage does not disappear forever, yet many institutions have not begun this work. In addition, archived websites are not easily discoverable, which severely limits their use. To address this challenge, OCLC Research has established the OCLC Research Library Partnership Web Archiving Metadata Working Group to develop a data dictionary that will be compatible with library and archives standards. Three reports on this project are available in late 2017, focused on metadata best practices guidelines, user needs and behaviors, and evaluation of web archiving tools.
Libraries, collections, technology: presented at Pennylvania State University...lisld
Library collections are changing in a network environment. This presentation considers how collections are being reconfigured, it looks at research support services, and it explores the shift from the purchased/licensed collection to the facilitated collection.
Keynote presented at the International Association of University Libraries Conference (IATUL), 20 June 2017 in Bolzano, Italy.
Library metadata was created to describe objects and enable a reader to understand when they had the same or a different object in hand. Now linked data concepts and techniques are allowing us to recreate, merge, and link our metadata assets in new ways that better support discovery - both in our local systems and on the wider web. Tennant described this migration and the potential it has for solving key discovery problems.
Presented at Industry Symposium, IFLA, 14 August 2008. Describes a new environment of global information services using metadata, taxonomies, and knowledge organization. Makes the case that these changes will permanently affect what it means "to catalog" materials for the purpose of connecting citizens, students and scholars to the information they need, when and where they need it.
Open data is a crucial prerequisite for inventing and disseminating the innovative practices needed for agricultural development. To be usable, data must not just be open in principle—i.e., covered by licenses that allow re-use. Data must also be published in a technical form that allows it to be integrated into a wide range of applications. The webinar will be of interest to any institution seeking ways to publish and curate data in the Linked Data cloud.
This webinar describes the technical solutions adopted by a widely diverse global network of agricultural research institutes for publishing research results. The talk focuses on AGRIS, a central and widely-used resource linking agricultural datasets for easy consumption, and AgriDrupal, an adaptation of the popular, open-source content management system Drupal optimized for producing and consuming linked datasets.
Agricultural research institutes in developing countries share many of the constraints faced by libraries and other documentation centers, and not just in developing countries: institutions are expected to expose their information on the Web in a re-usable form with shoestring budgets and with technical staff working in local languages and continually lured by higher-paying work in the private sector. Technical solutions must be easy to adopt and freely available.
Library futures: converging and diverging directions for public and academic ...lisld
The major influence on library futures is the changing character of their user communities. As patterns of research, learning and personal development change in a network environment so library services need to change. At the same time, libraries are focused on engaging with their communities more strongly - getting into their work and learning flows. This means that libraries are becoming more unlike each other, they are diverging as they meet the specific needs of their communities. Research libraries diverge from academic libraries, and each is different from urban public libraries, and so on.
At the same time, at a broader level libraries are experiencing similar pressures. The need to engage more strongly with their communities. The need to assess what they do. The need to configure space around experiences rather than around collections. Libraries are converging around some of these issues.
This presentation will consider the future of libraries from the point of view of convergence and divergence between types of libraries.
The facilitated collection: collections and collecting in a network environmentlisld
We often think of collections as local – whether owned or licensed. Increasingly this picture is changing in several ways. Libraries are sharing responsibility for collections. Libraries are providing access to materials they do not own, but which are available to their users (freely available digital book collections for example). Demand driven acquisitions changes the view of local collections. Institutions are also thinking about how to manage locally produced materials (research data for example) and support access across institutions. This trend is supported by changes as discovery is peeled away from local collections. This presentation discusses these trends, and collections and discovery change in a network environment.
This was a presentation at the Libraries Australia Forum, Melbourne, 2015
As described in the April NISO/DCMI webinar by Dan Brickley, schema.org is a search-engine initiative aimed at helping webmasters use structured data markup to improve the discovery and display of search results. Drupal 7 makes it easy to markup HTML pages with schema.org terms, allowing users to quickly build websites with structured data that can be understood by Google and displayed as Rich Snippets.
Improved search results are only part of the story, however. Data-bearing documents become machine-processable once you find them. The subject matter, important facts, calendar events, authorship, licensing, and whatever else you might like to share become there for the taking. Sales reports, RSS feeds, industry analysis, maps, diagrams and process artifacts can now connect back to other data sets to provide linkage to context and related content. The key to this is the adoption standards for both the data model (RDF) and the means of weaving it into documents (RDFa). Drupal 7 has become the leading content platform to adopt these standards.
This webinar will describe how RDFa and Drupal 7 can improve how organizations publish information and data on the Web for both internal and external consumption. It will discuss what is required to use these features and how they impact publication workflow. The talk will focus on high-level and accessible demonstrations of what is possible. Technical people should learn how to proceed while non-technical people will learn what is possible.
Libraries around the world have a long tradition of maintaining authority files to assure the consistent presentation and indexing of names. As library authority files have become available online, the authority data has become accessible -- and many have been published as Linked Open Data (LOD) -- but names in one library authority file typically had no link to corresponding records for persons and organizations in other library authority files. After a successful experiment in matching the Library of Congress/NACO authority file with the German National Library's authority file, an online system called the Virtual International Authority File was developed to facilitate sharing by ingesting, matching, and displaying the relations between records in multiple authority files.
The Virtual International Authority File (VIAF) has grown from three source files in 2007 to more than two dozen files today. The system harvests authority records, enhances them with bibliographic information and brings them together into clusters when it is confident the records describe the same identity. Although the most visible part of VIAF is a HTML interface, the API beneath it supports a linked data view of VIAF with URIs representing the identities themselves, not just URIs for the clusters. It supports names for person, corporations, geographic entities, works, and expressions. With English, French, German, Spanish interfaces (and a Japanese in process), the system is used around the world, with over a million queries per day.
Speaker
Thomas Hickey is Chief Scientist at OCLC where he helped found OCLC Research. Current interests include metadata creation and editing systems, authority control, parallel systems for bibliographic processing, and information retrieval and display. In addition to implementing VIAF, his group looks into exploring Web access to metadata, identification of FRBR works and expressions in WorldCat, the algorithmic creation of authorities, and the characterization of collections. He has an undergraduate degree in Physics and a Ph.D. in Library and Information Science.
Linked Data Implementations—Who, What and Why?OCLC
Presented at the CNI Spring Membership Meeting in San Antonio, Texas 4 April 2016. OCLC Research conducted an International Linked Data Survey for Implementers in 2014 and 2015, receiving responses from a total of 90 institutions in 20 countries. In the 2015 survey, 112 projects or services that consumed or published linked data were described (compared to 76 in 2014). This presentation summarizes the 2015 survey results: 1) which institutions have implemented or are implementing linked data; 2) what linked data sources institutions are consuming, and why; 3) what institutions are publishing, and why; 4) barriers and advice from the implementers.
Next Generation Technical Services May 2009 CalhounKaren S Calhoun
This is a long version of the talk I gave for the Spring Assembly of the Librarians Association of the University of California, May 13, 2009, UC Riverside Palm Desert Campus
Rightscaling, engagement, learning: reconfiguring the library for a network e...lisld
The edge of the world. Theta 2013: the Higher Education Technology Agenda. Hobart, Tasmania, 7-10 April, 2013.
The network continues to reconfigure personal and organizational relationships. Libraries face three important challenges in this environment.
1. Rightscaling infrastructure.
Libraries were predominantly ‘institution-scale’ – they provided services at the level of the institution for their local users. However, their users now look to the network for information services (e.g. Google Scholar, Wikipedia, …). And libraries now look to the network to collaborate or to externalize services (e.g. HathiTrust, cloud-based discovery or systems, shared systems infrastructure, …). In this environment the need for local infrastructure declines (e.g. extensive print collections, redundantly deployed local systems which provide necessary but not distinctive services). The scale advantage manifests itself in both impact and efficiency.
2. The shift to engagement.
Users used to build their workflows around libraries. Now the library needs to build services around user workflows, as those workflows form around network services. Libraries used to acquire and organize ‘published’ materials. Now they are engaged with the full range of creation, management and disclosure of learning and scholarly resources. Library spaces were configured around print collections; now they are configured around experiences, expertise, and specialist facilities. These are all examples of how libraries are reallocating resource and effort to engage more strongly with the learning and research lives of their users, improving the learning experience and making research more productive and research outputs more visible.
3. Institutional innovation
Innovation is important, especially to support greater engagement. But in many ways the most important form of innovation is institutional. Libraries have to develop new and routine ways of collaborating to achieve their goals. At the same time they have to negotiate internal boundaries and forge new structures within institutions. In each case, they are developing new ‘relationship architectures’. Think for example of the institutional innovation required to move to shared systems and collections in the Orbis Cascade Alliance or 2CUL for example. Or think of the innovative approach which makes new relationships within institutions (with Learning and Teaching Support, with the Office of Research, the University Press, emerging e-research infrastructure, IT, etc, for example, or with various educational or social services in a public setting). Evolving such relationships requires an enterprising approach and ensures continual learning.
Presented at Industry Symposium, IFLA, 14 August 2008. Describes a new environment of global information services using metadata, taxonomies, and knowledge organization. Makes the case that these changes will permanently affect what it means "to catalog" materials for the purpose of connecting citizens, students and scholars to the information they need, when and where they need it.
Open data is a crucial prerequisite for inventing and disseminating the innovative practices needed for agricultural development. To be usable, data must not just be open in principle—i.e., covered by licenses that allow re-use. Data must also be published in a technical form that allows it to be integrated into a wide range of applications. The webinar will be of interest to any institution seeking ways to publish and curate data in the Linked Data cloud.
This webinar describes the technical solutions adopted by a widely diverse global network of agricultural research institutes for publishing research results. The talk focuses on AGRIS, a central and widely-used resource linking agricultural datasets for easy consumption, and AgriDrupal, an adaptation of the popular, open-source content management system Drupal optimized for producing and consuming linked datasets.
Agricultural research institutes in developing countries share many of the constraints faced by libraries and other documentation centers, and not just in developing countries: institutions are expected to expose their information on the Web in a re-usable form with shoestring budgets and with technical staff working in local languages and continually lured by higher-paying work in the private sector. Technical solutions must be easy to adopt and freely available.
Library futures: converging and diverging directions for public and academic ...lisld
The major influence on library futures is the changing character of their user communities. As patterns of research, learning and personal development change in a network environment so library services need to change. At the same time, libraries are focused on engaging with their communities more strongly - getting into their work and learning flows. This means that libraries are becoming more unlike each other, they are diverging as they meet the specific needs of their communities. Research libraries diverge from academic libraries, and each is different from urban public libraries, and so on.
At the same time, at a broader level libraries are experiencing similar pressures. The need to engage more strongly with their communities. The need to assess what they do. The need to configure space around experiences rather than around collections. Libraries are converging around some of these issues.
This presentation will consider the future of libraries from the point of view of convergence and divergence between types of libraries.
The facilitated collection: collections and collecting in a network environmentlisld
We often think of collections as local – whether owned or licensed. Increasingly this picture is changing in several ways. Libraries are sharing responsibility for collections. Libraries are providing access to materials they do not own, but which are available to their users (freely available digital book collections for example). Demand driven acquisitions changes the view of local collections. Institutions are also thinking about how to manage locally produced materials (research data for example) and support access across institutions. This trend is supported by changes as discovery is peeled away from local collections. This presentation discusses these trends, and collections and discovery change in a network environment.
This was a presentation at the Libraries Australia Forum, Melbourne, 2015
As described in the April NISO/DCMI webinar by Dan Brickley, schema.org is a search-engine initiative aimed at helping webmasters use structured data markup to improve the discovery and display of search results. Drupal 7 makes it easy to markup HTML pages with schema.org terms, allowing users to quickly build websites with structured data that can be understood by Google and displayed as Rich Snippets.
Improved search results are only part of the story, however. Data-bearing documents become machine-processable once you find them. The subject matter, important facts, calendar events, authorship, licensing, and whatever else you might like to share become there for the taking. Sales reports, RSS feeds, industry analysis, maps, diagrams and process artifacts can now connect back to other data sets to provide linkage to context and related content. The key to this is the adoption standards for both the data model (RDF) and the means of weaving it into documents (RDFa). Drupal 7 has become the leading content platform to adopt these standards.
This webinar will describe how RDFa and Drupal 7 can improve how organizations publish information and data on the Web for both internal and external consumption. It will discuss what is required to use these features and how they impact publication workflow. The talk will focus on high-level and accessible demonstrations of what is possible. Technical people should learn how to proceed while non-technical people will learn what is possible.
Libraries around the world have a long tradition of maintaining authority files to assure the consistent presentation and indexing of names. As library authority files have become available online, the authority data has become accessible -- and many have been published as Linked Open Data (LOD) -- but names in one library authority file typically had no link to corresponding records for persons and organizations in other library authority files. After a successful experiment in matching the Library of Congress/NACO authority file with the German National Library's authority file, an online system called the Virtual International Authority File was developed to facilitate sharing by ingesting, matching, and displaying the relations between records in multiple authority files.
The Virtual International Authority File (VIAF) has grown from three source files in 2007 to more than two dozen files today. The system harvests authority records, enhances them with bibliographic information and brings them together into clusters when it is confident the records describe the same identity. Although the most visible part of VIAF is a HTML interface, the API beneath it supports a linked data view of VIAF with URIs representing the identities themselves, not just URIs for the clusters. It supports names for person, corporations, geographic entities, works, and expressions. With English, French, German, Spanish interfaces (and a Japanese in process), the system is used around the world, with over a million queries per day.
Speaker
Thomas Hickey is Chief Scientist at OCLC where he helped found OCLC Research. Current interests include metadata creation and editing systems, authority control, parallel systems for bibliographic processing, and information retrieval and display. In addition to implementing VIAF, his group looks into exploring Web access to metadata, identification of FRBR works and expressions in WorldCat, the algorithmic creation of authorities, and the characterization of collections. He has an undergraduate degree in Physics and a Ph.D. in Library and Information Science.
Linked Data Implementations—Who, What and Why?OCLC
Presented at the CNI Spring Membership Meeting in San Antonio, Texas 4 April 2016. OCLC Research conducted an International Linked Data Survey for Implementers in 2014 and 2015, receiving responses from a total of 90 institutions in 20 countries. In the 2015 survey, 112 projects or services that consumed or published linked data were described (compared to 76 in 2014). This presentation summarizes the 2015 survey results: 1) which institutions have implemented or are implementing linked data; 2) what linked data sources institutions are consuming, and why; 3) what institutions are publishing, and why; 4) barriers and advice from the implementers.
Next Generation Technical Services May 2009 CalhounKaren S Calhoun
This is a long version of the talk I gave for the Spring Assembly of the Librarians Association of the University of California, May 13, 2009, UC Riverside Palm Desert Campus
Rightscaling, engagement, learning: reconfiguring the library for a network e...lisld
The edge of the world. Theta 2013: the Higher Education Technology Agenda. Hobart, Tasmania, 7-10 April, 2013.
The network continues to reconfigure personal and organizational relationships. Libraries face three important challenges in this environment.
1. Rightscaling infrastructure.
Libraries were predominantly ‘institution-scale’ – they provided services at the level of the institution for their local users. However, their users now look to the network for information services (e.g. Google Scholar, Wikipedia, …). And libraries now look to the network to collaborate or to externalize services (e.g. HathiTrust, cloud-based discovery or systems, shared systems infrastructure, …). In this environment the need for local infrastructure declines (e.g. extensive print collections, redundantly deployed local systems which provide necessary but not distinctive services). The scale advantage manifests itself in both impact and efficiency.
2. The shift to engagement.
Users used to build their workflows around libraries. Now the library needs to build services around user workflows, as those workflows form around network services. Libraries used to acquire and organize ‘published’ materials. Now they are engaged with the full range of creation, management and disclosure of learning and scholarly resources. Library spaces were configured around print collections; now they are configured around experiences, expertise, and specialist facilities. These are all examples of how libraries are reallocating resource and effort to engage more strongly with the learning and research lives of their users, improving the learning experience and making research more productive and research outputs more visible.
3. Institutional innovation
Innovation is important, especially to support greater engagement. But in many ways the most important form of innovation is institutional. Libraries have to develop new and routine ways of collaborating to achieve their goals. At the same time they have to negotiate internal boundaries and forge new structures within institutions. In each case, they are developing new ‘relationship architectures’. Think for example of the institutional innovation required to move to shared systems and collections in the Orbis Cascade Alliance or 2CUL for example. Or think of the innovative approach which makes new relationships within institutions (with Learning and Teaching Support, with the Office of Research, the University Press, emerging e-research infrastructure, IT, etc, for example, or with various educational or social services in a public setting). Evolving such relationships requires an enterprising approach and ensures continual learning.
This paper surveys the landscape of linked open data projects in cultural heritage, exam- ining the work of groups from around the world. Traditionally, linked open data has been ranked using the five star method proposed by Tim Berners-Lee. We found this ranking to be lacking when evaluating how cultural heritage groups not merely develop linked open datasets, but find ways to used linked data to augment user experience. Building on the five-star method, we developed a six-stage life cycle describing both dataset development and dataset usage. We use this framework to describe and evaluate fifteen linked open data projects in the realm of cultural heritage.
Lecture at the advanced course on Data Science of the SIKS research school, May 20, 2016, Vught, The Netherlands.
Contents
-Why do we create Linked Open Data? Example questions from the Humanities and Social Sciences
-Introduction into Linked Open Data
-Lessons learned about the creation of Linked Open Data (link discovery, knowledge representation, evaluation).
-Accessing Linked Open Data
Presented for managers & researchers at The Global One Health Initiative of the Ohio State University, Africa Regional Branch in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia (April 24th 2019)
An overview of Wikipedia and its potential for libraries, also covering cataloguing issues. Part of the Cataloguing and Indexing Group in Scotland (CIGS) seminar "Toto, I've got a feeling we're not in Kansas anymore": metadata issues and Web2.0 services.
Presented at the International Internet Preservation Consortium (IIPC) Web Archiving Week, University of London, 16 June 2017.
Web archiving has become imperative to ensure that our digital heritage does not disappear forever, yet many institutions have not begun this work. In addition, archived websites are not easily discoverable, which severely limits their use. To address this challenge, OCLC Research has established the OCLC Research Library Partnership Web Archiving Metadata Working Group to develop a data dictionary that will be compatible with library and archives standards. Three reports on this project are available in July 2017, focused on metadata best practices guidelines, user needs and behaviors, and evaluation of web archiving tools.
More information: oc.lc/wam
Contact: Jackie Dooley, dooleyj@oclc.org
Steven McEachern - ADA, DDI (metadata standard) and the Data LifecycleSteve Androulakis
Dr. McEachern is Director of the Australian Data Archive at the Australian National University, and has research interests in data management and archiving, community and social attitude surveys, new data collection methods, and reproducible research methods.
This talk was given for the Monthly Tech Talks event hosted by Australian data infrastructure groups ANDS, NeCTAR, RDS and others.
Who's the Author? Identifier soup - ORCID, ISNI, LC NACO and VIAFSimeon Warner
Identifiers, including ORCID, ISNI, LC NACO and VIAF, are playing an increasing role in library authority work. Well describe changes to cataloging practices to leverage identifiers. We'll then tell a short story of the how and why of ORCID identifiers for researchers, and relationships with other person identifiers. Finally, we'll discuss the use of identifiers as part of moves toward linked data cataloging being explored in Linked Data for Libraries work (in the LD4L Labs and LD4P projects).
Charleston 2012 - The Future of Serials in a Linked Data WorldProQuest
The educational objective of this session is to review today’s MARC-based environment in which the serial record predominates, and compare that with what might be possible in a future world of linked data. The session will inspire conversation and reflection on a number of questions. What will a world of statement-based rather than record-based metadata look like? What will a new environment mean for library systems, workflows, and information dissemination?
Designing the Garden: Getting Grounded in Linked DataJenn Riley
Riley, Jenn. “Designing the Garden: Getting Grounded in Linked Data.” Beyond the Looking Glass: Real World Linked Data. What Does it Take to Make it Work? ALCTS Preconference, San Francisco, CA, June 26, 2015.
Riley, Jenn. “Launching metaware.buzz.” Panelist, Experimental Scholarly Publishing: Building New Models with Distributed Communities of Practice”, Digital Library Federation Forum, October 28, 2014, Atlanta, GA.
Riley, Jenn. “Getting Comfortable with Metadata Reuse.” O Rare! Performance in Special Collections: The 54th Annual RBMS Preconference, Minneapolis, June 23 – 26, 2013
The Open Archives Initiative and the Sheet Music ConsortiumJenn Riley
Dunn, Jon and Jenn Riley. “The Open Archives Initiative and the Sheet Music Consortium.” Digital Library Program Brown Bag Presentation, October 10, 2003.
Cushman Exposed! Exploiting Controlled Vocabularies to Enhance Browsing and S...Jenn Riley
Dalmau, Michelle and Jenn Riley. "Cushman Exposed! Exploiting Controlled Vocabularies to Enhance Browsing and Searching of an Online Photograph Collection." Digital Library Program Brown Bag Presentation, May 17, 2004.
Handout for Merging Metadata from Multiple Traditions: IN Harmony Sheet Music...Jenn Riley
Riley, Jenn. "Merging Metadata from Multiple Traditions: IN Harmony Sheet Music from Libraries and Museums." Digital Library Program Brown Bag Presentation, October 19, 2005.
Merging Metadata from Multiple Traditions: IN Harmony Sheet Music from Librar...Jenn Riley
Riley, Jenn. "Merging Metadata from Multiple Traditions: IN Harmony Sheet Music from Libraries and Museums." Digital Library Program Brown Bag Presentation, October 19, 2005.
Challenges in the Nursery: Linking a Finding Aid with Online ContentJenn Riley
Johnson, Elizabeth, and Jenn Riley. "Challenges in the Nursery: Linking a Finding Aid with Online Content." Digital Library Program Brown Bag Presentation, March 8, 2006.
Model Attribute Check Company Auto PropertyCeline George
In Odoo, the multi-company feature allows you to manage multiple companies within a single Odoo database instance. Each company can have its own configurations while still sharing common resources such as products, customers, and suppliers.
The French Revolution, which began in 1789, was a period of radical social and political upheaval in France. It marked the decline of absolute monarchies, the rise of secular and democratic republics, and the eventual rise of Napoleon Bonaparte. This revolutionary period is crucial in understanding the transition from feudalism to modernity in Europe.
For more information, visit-www.vavaclasses.com
We all have good and bad thoughts from time to time and situation to situation. We are bombarded daily with spiraling thoughts(both negative and positive) creating all-consuming feel , making us difficult to manage with associated suffering. Good thoughts are like our Mob Signal (Positive thought) amidst noise(negative thought) in the atmosphere. Negative thoughts like noise outweigh positive thoughts. These thoughts often create unwanted confusion, trouble, stress and frustration in our mind as well as chaos in our physical world. Negative thoughts are also known as “distorted thinking”.
Instructions for Submissions thorugh G- Classroom.pptxJheel Barad
This presentation provides a briefing on how to upload submissions and documents in Google Classroom. It was prepared as part of an orientation for new Sainik School in-service teacher trainees. As a training officer, my goal is to ensure that you are comfortable and proficient with this essential tool for managing assignments and fostering student engagement.
The Roman Empire A Historical Colossus.pdfkaushalkr1407
The Roman Empire, a vast and enduring power, stands as one of history's most remarkable civilizations, leaving an indelible imprint on the world. It emerged from the Roman Republic, transitioning into an imperial powerhouse under the leadership of Augustus Caesar in 27 BCE. This transformation marked the beginning of an era defined by unprecedented territorial expansion, architectural marvels, and profound cultural influence.
The empire's roots lie in the city of Rome, founded, according to legend, by Romulus in 753 BCE. Over centuries, Rome evolved from a small settlement to a formidable republic, characterized by a complex political system with elected officials and checks on power. However, internal strife, class conflicts, and military ambitions paved the way for the end of the Republic. Julius Caesar’s dictatorship and subsequent assassination in 44 BCE created a power vacuum, leading to a civil war. Octavian, later Augustus, emerged victorious, heralding the Roman Empire’s birth.
Under Augustus, the empire experienced the Pax Romana, a 200-year period of relative peace and stability. Augustus reformed the military, established efficient administrative systems, and initiated grand construction projects. The empire's borders expanded, encompassing territories from Britain to Egypt and from Spain to the Euphrates. Roman legions, renowned for their discipline and engineering prowess, secured and maintained these vast territories, building roads, fortifications, and cities that facilitated control and integration.
The Roman Empire’s society was hierarchical, with a rigid class system. At the top were the patricians, wealthy elites who held significant political power. Below them were the plebeians, free citizens with limited political influence, and the vast numbers of slaves who formed the backbone of the economy. The family unit was central, governed by the paterfamilias, the male head who held absolute authority.
Culturally, the Romans were eclectic, absorbing and adapting elements from the civilizations they encountered, particularly the Greeks. Roman art, literature, and philosophy reflected this synthesis, creating a rich cultural tapestry. Latin, the Roman language, became the lingua franca of the Western world, influencing numerous modern languages.
Roman architecture and engineering achievements were monumental. They perfected the arch, vault, and dome, constructing enduring structures like the Colosseum, Pantheon, and aqueducts. These engineering marvels not only showcased Roman ingenuity but also served practical purposes, from public entertainment to water supply.
This is a presentation by Dada Robert in a Your Skill Boost masterclass organised by the Excellence Foundation for South Sudan (EFSS) on Saturday, the 25th and Sunday, the 26th of May 2024.
He discussed the concept of quality improvement, emphasizing its applicability to various aspects of life, including personal, project, and program improvements. He defined quality as doing the right thing at the right time in the right way to achieve the best possible results and discussed the concept of the "gap" between what we know and what we do, and how this gap represents the areas we need to improve. He explained the scientific approach to quality improvement, which involves systematic performance analysis, testing and learning, and implementing change ideas. He also highlighted the importance of client focus and a team approach to quality improvement.
Unit 8 - Information and Communication Technology (Paper I).pdfThiyagu K
This slides describes the basic concepts of ICT, basics of Email, Emerging Technology and Digital Initiatives in Education. This presentations aligns with the UGC Paper I syllabus.
How libraries can support authors with open access requirements for UKRI fund...
Creating Shareable Metadata
1. Creating Shareable Metadata
Pre-Conference at WebWise 2006:
Inspiring Discovery: Unlocking Collections
Los Angeles, CA February 15, 2006
Jenn Riley, Indiana University
Sarah Shreeves, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Liz Milewicz, Emory University
2. What does this record describe?
identifier: http://name.university.edu/IC-FISH3ICX0802]1004_112
publisher: Museum of Zoology, Fish Field Notes
format:
jpeg
rights:
These pages may be freely searched and
displayed. Permission must be received for
subsequent distribution in print or electronically.
type:
image
subject: 1926-05-18; 1926; 0812; 18; Trib. to Sixteen Cr.
Trib. Pine River, Manistee R.; JAM26-460; 05;
1926/05/18; R10W; S26; S27; T21N
language: UND
source: Michigan 1926 Metzelaar, 1926--1926;
description: Flora and Fauna of the Great Lakes Region
February 15, 2006
Creating Shareable
Dublin Core record retrieved
via the OAI Protocol
4. And this one?
• Sample Record (adapted from an Illinois
database)
February 15, 2006
Creating Shareable
5. Agenda
Time for questions
between each section
1. Introduction
2. Why share metadata
anyway?
3. What is shareable
metadata?
4. How do you create
shareable metadata?
5. Communication and
documentation
6. Before you share…
February 15, 2006
Creating Shareable
Packets
Break around 2:45
6. We hope that you will leave today and…
• Understand the need for interoperable or
shareable metadata
• Understand the impact your metadata
has on larger aggregations
• Understand the key components of
shareable metadata
• Think critically about the shareability of
their own metadata.
February 15, 2006
Creating Shareable
7. What we aren’t covering…
• How to share metadata (whether via
the OAI Protocol, SRW/U, FTP, CD-ROM,
Cooperative Cataloging, Excel
Spreadsheet!)
• Details of technical aspects of
shareable metadata such as
XML schema & namespaces
• How to use specific metadata
O
formats ne Size Does Not Fit All!
February 15, 2006
Creating Shareable
9. Why share metadata anyway?
• Benefits to users
– Single search of a variety of digital resources
– Aggregation of subject-specific resources
– Higher quality resources
• Benefits to institutions
― Increased user access to collection by
allowing metadata to appear in other
places
― Exposure to broader audience, new users
― Surfacing rare, unknown, or scattered
collections
February 15, 2006
Creating Shareable
10. Different shapes and sizes…
• Range of different aggregations:
– focused subject area v. comprehensive
– specialized audience v. general
audience
• Range of different displays
February 15, 2006
Creating Shareable
11. Metadata aggregators
• CIC Metadata Portal
http://cicharvest.grainger.uiuc.edu/
– Records and digital resources shared by consortium of
institutions, provided for
– Educators, researchers, and general public
Benefits:
Single comprehensive search of
multiple collections and a variety of disciplines
February 15, 2006
Creating Shareable
Next
15. Metadata aggregators
• National Science Digital Library
http://nsdl.org
- Online resources and records pertaining to science &
math education and research, vetted for inclusion,
provided for
- Educators, researchers, policy makers, and the general
public
Benefits:
Single portal serving a range of resources on a
specialized topic to a diverse audience
February 15, 2006
Creating Shareable
Next
19. Metadata aggregators
• Collaborative Digitization Program
http://www.cdpheritage.org/
- Records and digital resources from archives, museums,
and libraries, pertaining to cultural heritage of the
American West
provided for
- Educators, researchers, and the general public
Benefits:
Single portal serving a range of resources on a
specialized topic to a diverse audience
February 15, 2006
Creating Shareable
Next
25. Common Problems with Metadata in
Aggregation
• Consistency
• Sufficiency
• Compatibility
February 15, 2006
Creating Shareable
26. Consistency problems
•
•
•
•
Appearance of data
Application of format
Granularity of records
Vocabulary usage
Result:
Service Provider must normalize data
(if can determine what “normal” is)
February 15, 2006
Creating Shareable
27. Sufficiency problems
• Too little info for understanding what
resource is, especially outside of local
context
Result:
Users don’t know whether a resource is
relevant or not
February 15, 2006
Creating Shareable
28. Compatibility problems
Information in records is
– Erroneous
– Unnecessary
– Incompatible
Result:
Interferes with harvesting and indexing
February 15, 2006
Creating Shareable
31. Shareable Metadata…
- Promotes search interoperability
“the ability to perform a search over
diverse sets of metadata records and
obtain meaningful results.” (Priscilla
Caplan)
- Is (at the least) human understandable
outside of its local context (the field note!)
- Is useful outside of its local context
(Can we build something off of it?)
- Preferably is machine processable!
February 15, 2006
Creating Shareable
32. The Four C’s (and lots of S’s) of Shareable
Metadata
Consistency
Coherence
Context
Conformance
Metadata standards
(and not just DC)
Vocabulary and encoding standards
Descriptive content standards
(AACR2, CCO, DACS)
Technical standards
(XML, Character encoding, etc)
February 15, 2006
Creating Shareable
34. How do you create
shareable metadata?
February 15, 2006
Creating Shareable
35. Appropriate representation of the
resource through metadata
• Metadata as a view of the
resource
• Standards promote
interoperability
• Appropriate formats
• Appropriate content
• Appropriate context
February 15, 2006
Creating Shareable
36. Metadata as a view of the resource
• Metadata for the same thing is different
depending on use and audience
• Affected by format, content, and
context
• Harry Potter as represented by…
– a public library
– an online bookstore
– a fan site
February 15, 2006
Creating Shareable
37. Same Object,
Different Descriptions,
Different Metadata
Illinois Digital Archives (alt)
University of Minnesota Libraries
(alt)
Northwestern Poster Collection
(alt)
Teaching with Digital Content (alt)
World War II Poster
February 15, 2006
Creating Shareable
38. Choice of vocabularies as a view
• Names
– LCNAF: Michelangelo Buonarroti, 14751564
– ULAN: Buonarroti, Michelangelo
• Places
– LCSH: Jakarta (Indonesia)
– TGN: Jakarta
• Subjects
– LCSH: Neo-impressionism (Art)
– AAT: Pointillism
February 15, 2006
Creating Shareable
40. Types of standards to consider
• Data structure standards
– “Buckets” of information (fields)
– Both label and scope important
– e.g., MARC, MODS, Dublin Core
• Data content standards
– Selection, structure and formatting
of value within a field
– e.g., AACR2, DACS, CCO
February 15, 2006
Creating Shareable
41. Appropriate formats
• Depends upon:
–
–
–
–
–
nature of materials
nature of holding institution
depth of description needed
community practice
need for distinction between
versions
– need for repeating elements
• MARC, MODS, Dublin Core, EAD,
and TEI may all be appropriate
for a single item
February 15, 2006
Creating Shareable
43. Appropriate content
•
•
•
•
•
•
Choose appropriate vocabularies
Choose appropriate granularity
Make it obvious what to display
Exclude unnecessary “filler”
Make it clear what links point to
Handout has some guidance for
“classes of metadata elements”
February 15, 2006
Creating Shareable
44. Common content mistakes
• No indication of vocabulary
used - Example
• Shared record for a single
page in a book
• Link goes to search interface
rather than item being
described
• “Unknown” or “N/A” in
metadata record
February 15, 2006
Creating Shareable
45. Appropriate context
• Thinking about shareability
– Include information not used locally
– Exclude information only used locally
• Current safe assumptions
– Users discover material through shared record
– User then delivered to your environment for full
context
• Context driven by intended use
February 15, 2006
Creating Shareable
46. Common context mistakes
• Leaving out information that
applies to an entire collection
(“On a horse”)
• Location information lacking
parent institution
• Geographic information
lacking higher-level
jurisdiction
• Inclusion of administrative
metadata
February 15, 2006
Creating Shareable
47. What are you describing?
Physical object w/
links to the digital?
(Digital surrogate
approach)
Both digital and physical
in the same flat record?
Both digital and physicalin the same record but ina hierarch
Content but not the carrier?
A record for theanalog and thedigital item withlinkage?
(one to one principle)
February 15, 2006
Creating Shareable
49. Communication
• Metadata providers can
learn from aggregators
• Aggregators can learn
from metadata providers
• Providing supplemental
information to make
records more intelligible
February 15, 2006
Creating Shareable
50. Metadata providers can learn from
aggregators
• Crosswalking methods and rules
• Information to include and exclude
• Choice of standards
– Metadata formats
– Vocabularies
• Where to spend normalization effort
• Use can drive future priorities
Example from the CIC Portal… (alt)
February 15, 2006
Creating Shareable
51. Aggregators can learn from metadata
providers
• Where to spend normalization effort
• Context, importance, and primary uses of
resources shared
• Variety of resource types
and descriptive practices
encountered
• Local, robust
metadata formats
February 15, 2006
Creating Shareable
52. Providing supplemental information to
make records more intelligible
• Method for creating shared records
• Vocabularies and content standards
used in shared records
• Record updating practices & schedules
• Accrual practices and
schedules
• Existence of analytical or
supplementary materials
• Provenance of materials
February 15, 2006
Creating Shareable
53. Before you share…
• Check your metadata
–
–
–
–
Appropriate view?
Consistent?
Context provided?
Does the aggregator have
what they need?
– Documented?
Can a stranger tell you what
the record describes?
February 15, 2006
Creating Shareable
![What does this record describe?
identifier: http://name.university.edu/IC-FISH3ICX0802]1004_112
publisher: Museum of Zoology, Fish Field Notes
format:
jpeg
rights:
These pages may be freely searched and
displayed. Permission must be received for
subsequent distribution in print or electronically.
type:
image
subject: 1926-05-18; 1926; 0812; 18; Trib. to Sixteen Cr.
Trib. Pine River, Manistee R.; JAM26-460; 05;
1926/05/18; R10W; S26; S27; T21N
language: UND
source: Michigan 1926 Metzelaar, 1926--1926;
description: Flora and Fauna of the Great Lakes Region
February 15, 2006
Creating Shareable
Dublin Core record retrieved
via the OAI Protocol]()