![]() |
Metadata and Digital Repositories |
| the centre for educational technology interoperability standards | |
about the sig
SIG home resources
standards and specs about cetis |
Please note: this site is no longer updated. For the current Metadata and Digital Repository SIG website, please visit http://wiki.cetis.ac.uk/Metadata. SIG Meeting Report: University of Liverpool, 30 June 2004Report by Phil Barker A list of attendees is given at the end of this report. IntroductionPhil Barker gave a brief introduction to the day and to the aims and activities of CETIS. [Introduction, powerpoint presentation, 62kB.] Specification UpdatePhil also gave a brief update on concerning some spec developments, which touched on:
[Recent
Spec Developments, powerpoint presentation, 146kB] Metadata Workflows in Learning Object RepositoriesJane Barton, of the Centre
for Digital Library Research at Strathclyde University gave an
overview of a new JISC-funded
project at CDLR that will investigate the
practicality and sustainability of different approaches to the creation
of metadata for institutional learning object repositories and ePrint
archives. The project will attempt to unpack what is meant by "metadata
quality" and will investigate how this is supported by the UK LOM Core
and Dublin Core, covering not just the suitability of metadata for
discovery and retrieval but also for the management and preservation of
resources. The results will support JISC activities such as the X4L and
FAIR programmes and the JORUM. The timescale for all of this work is
tight, with the final report being due in September, so consultations,
reviews and case studies will take place over the summer. [For more details see Jane's
powerpoint presentation, 64kB] Metadata Collection the HLSI WayKieran O'Farrell of the High
Level Skills for Industry project gave a description of how that
project had addressed problems with the quality of the metadata being
entered into their repository by content producers. A review of the
metadata in the repository by metadata specialists
(librarians) had identified problems such as metadata
descriptions that related to the format of the object rather than its
content (e.g. "a flash object"), over zealous use of cut-and-paste, and
template defaults that were never changed. Kieran reported how a
working group of librarians, a subject tutor and a software developer
had suggested changes to the metadata creation tools, work practices
and systems in order to improve the quality of the metadata. This
included:
[For a fuller explanation see Kieran's slides,
powerpoint, 250kB] JISC Information Environment Metadata Schema RegistryPete Johnston of UKOLN
presented an overview of a new Jisc funded project to create a Metadata Schema Registry
for the JISC IE. The project will provide a pilot metadata schema
registry as a shared service in the JISC IE that will provide machine
(and human) readable information about metadata vocabularies used by
other services in the IE. It is hoped that the disclosure of this
information will aid interoperability by enabling the discovery and reuse of
metadata terms and vocabularies in common use and providing pointers to
supporting materials such as use guidelines, bindings, transformations
etc. The Schema registry would thus store information on metadata
application profiles being used and would support the development of
interoperable application profiles. Pete then described some of his
work
on modeling Dublin Core and LOM application profiles, contrasting the
selection of single terms from the "flat" Dublin Core to the "pruning"
of branches from the LOM hierarchy, the latter of which had not been
well represented in previous metadata schema registry work. [Pete's slides are available on the UKOLN website in Powerpoint
and HTML
format] Harvesting LOM Records Over OAIFirst, here's something which wasn't presented at the meeting due to lack of time. I had prepared some background to the RDN-LTSN interoperability project, covering who the RDN and LTSN are, what they do and where they overlap in what they do, and a general overview of the OAI-PMH based approach taken to making sure that they approach the overlap in their remits without duplicating effort. [This summary as powerpoint slides, 107kB] Paul Hollands, of LTSN-01 gave a presentation based on his work in developing software and guidelines to support the RDN-LTSN partnership projects. Paul described the approach which has been taken: creating a profile of the LOM for this work (the RLLOMAP, which though it was developed independently from the UK LOM Core has been made compatible with it); adapting OAI-PMH software which supports to Dublin Core so that it also support the RLLOMAP; and some of the problems encountered on the way (with his solutions). I don't think Paul will mind being described as a "constructive skeptic" when it comes to the LOM and the UK LOM Core and his work has been useful in highlighting issues such as the difficulty of applying these specifications to the description of a broad range of resources, the lack of OAI tools for harvesting LOM records, and confusion caused by difficulty in forming a collective understanding of the LOM and how to use it. [Paul's presentation is available on the LTSN-01 website at http://www.ltsn-01.ac.uk/static/slides/metadata_sig1.html Accessibility Properties for Learning ResourcesFinally Andy Heath gave an account of work aiming to provide
resource metadata that would work in synergy with the information about
a user's resource preferences given in formats such as IMS ACCLIP (the
Accessibility Learner Information Package specification). The IMS
AccessForAll Meta-data Specification is one example of such
resource metadata, and Andy focused on his work with CEN/ISSS APLR
which is looking at how to create an application profile of the LOM for
this type of metadata. Andy showed how there were two approaches
possible: one based on re-using what was already in the LOM and thereby
benefiting from the current adoption of these elements; and the other
highlighting the accessibility metadata as separate, highly constrained
and therefor more interoperable, category extending the LOM. Andy
showed how the debate between proponents of the two approaches had
progressed, but at this time was not settled. [Andy's presentation
is available as in Powerpoint, 63kB, people interested in the
discussion can join the APLR
discussion list and view the
archive.] Attendees
Many thanks to all who attended, especially to those who gave presentations and to those at the UK Centre for Materials Education who helped with the organisation. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Maintained by Phil Barker and Neil Fegen. |