Essays

Metadata issues in Digital Libraries: key concepts and perspectives


Abstract


The article sets out to investigate the meaning, role and implications of some information management approaches used in Digital Library practice. A greater focus on innovation in managing online resources and on improving their interoperability can be achieved by normalizing metadata schemas through interoperable standards, world-wide accepted controlled vocabularies as well as by their enrichment through qualitatively constructed ontologies and linked data, which are key to the expansion of the semantic reasoning on the web through building and connection of additional semantic layers on top of metadata descriptions. Reviewing some innovative methods of information representation (LODe-BD, SWAP), the paper tries to lead the reader to discover some new ways of knowledge creation in digital information environment, in particular what concerns digital bibliographic records.

Keywords


Digital library; FRBR; Linked data; LODe-BD; Metadata; SWAP

Full Text:

Text


DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.4403/jlis.it-4663

NBN: http://nbn.depositolegale.it/urn%3Anbn%3Ait%3Aunifi-3806

References


Baker, Thomas. Basics of Dublin Core Metadata. 2009. Print.

---. “Designing Interoperable Metadata on Linked Data Principles.” Tutorial: Dublin Core -Building blocks for interoperability. 2009. Print.

---. Designing Interoperable Metadata on Linked Data Principles. Tutorial: Dublin Core -Building blocks for interoperability. 2009. Print.

Baker, Thomas et al. “What Terms Does Your Metadata Use? Application Profiles as Machine-Understandable Narratives.” 2.2 (2001): n. pag.

Bearman, David et al. “A common model to support interoperable metadata: progress report on reconciling metadata requirements from the Dublin Core and INDECS/DOI Communities.” 5.1 (1999): n. pag.

Bermudez, L., and M. Piasecki. “Metadata Community Profiles for the Semantic Web.” 10.2 (2006): 159-176.

Birrell, Duncan, Gordon Dunsire, and Kathleen Menzies. Web Catalogue and Repository Interoperability Study (OCRIS). Final Report, Centre for Digital Library Research, University of Strathclyde. 2009. Print.

Bradley, P. Allen. Faceted Navigation of User-Generated Metadata, Metadata Tools for Digital Resource Repositories. Print.

Broughton, Vanda. “Concepts and terms in the faceted classification: the case of UDC. Paper presented at UDC International Seminar: Classification at the crossroads, The Hague, 29-30 October, 2009.” Print.

Campbell, Grant D. “Metadata, Metaphor, and Metonymy.” Metadata: A Cataloger’s Primer. Ed. Richard Smiraglia. Haworth Information, 2006. Print.

Caplan, Priscilla. Metadata fundamentals for all librarians. American Library Association, 2003. Print.

Chan, Lois M, and Zeng M. Lei. “Metadata Interoperability and Standardization – A Study of Methodology. Achieving Interoperability at the Schema Level.” 12.6 (2006): n. pag.

Chopey, Michael A. “Planning and Implementing a Metadata-Driven Digital Repository.” Metadata: A Cataloger’s Primer. Ed. Richard Smiraglia. Haworth Information, 2006. Print.

Christopher, Lee. “A framework for contextual information in digital collections.” 67.1 (2011): n. pag. Print.

Cole, Timothy W., and Muriel Foulonneau. Using the Open Archive Initiative Protocol for Metadata Harvesting. Westport Connecticut, 2007. Print.

DCMI. DCMI Specifications. 2011. Print.

---. Dublin Core Metadata Element Set, version 1.0: Reference description. 1998. Print.

Delteil, Alexandre, Catherine Faron-Zucker, and Rose Dieng. “Learning ontologies from RDF annotations.” Proceedings of IJCAI-01 Workshop on Ontology Learning OL-2001. Ed. Alexander Maedche et al. 2001. Print.

“Dublin Core metadata initiative: Beyond the Element Set.” 22.1 (2010): n. pag.

Dunsire, Gordon. “Collecting metadata from institutional repositories.” 24.1 (2008): n. pag. Print.

Dunsire, Gordon, and Wirna Miller. “Initiatives to make standard library metadata models and structures available to the Semantic Web. Meeting 149. Information Technology, Cataloguing, Classification and Indexing with Knowledge Management.” 2010.

Duval, Erik et al. “Metadata Principles and Practicalities.” 8.4 (2002): n. pag.

El-Sherbini, Magda. “Metadata and the future of cataloging.” 50.1 (2001): 16-27. Print.

El-Sherbini, Magda, and George Klim. “Metadata and cataloging practices.” 22.3 (2004): 238-248. Print.

Encoded Archival Description. 2002. Print.

Functional Requirements of Authority Numbering and Records. 2010. Print.

Functional Requirements: the FRBR Family of Models. IFLA official website. 2011. Print.

Gambarara, Daniele. “Thesauri, mappe semantiche, ontologie. Problemi semantici e costruzioni concettuali.” Dal documento all’informazione. Ed. Roberto Guarasci. ITER, 2008. Print.

Gartner, R. Metadata for Digital Libraries: state of the art and future directions. Bristol: JISC, 2008. Print.

Gemberling, T. “Thema and FRBR’s Third Group.” 48.5 (200120120): 445-449.

Ghilli, C., and M. Guerrini. Introduzione a FRBR. Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records - Requisiti funzionali per record bibliografici. Milano: Editrice Bibliografica, 2001. Print.

Gill, Tony. “Metadata and the Web.” Introduction to Metadata. Ed. Murtha Baca. Getty Research Institute, 2008. Print.

Gilliland, Anne J. “Metadata - Where Are We Going?” International Yearbook of Library and Information Management: Metadata Applications and Management. Ed. Gary E. Gorman. Facet Publishing, 2003. Print.

---. “Setting the Stage.” Introduction to Metadata. Ed. Murtha Baca. Getty Research Institute, 2008. Print.

Gorman, Michael. “Electronic Resources: which are worth preserving & what is their role in library collections?” 2001. Print.

---. “Metadata or cataloguing? A false choices.” 2.1 (1999): n. pag.

Gradmann, Stefan. “Cataloguing vs. metadata: old wine in new bottles?” 28.4 (1999): n. pag. Print.

Graham, Rebecca A. “Metadata harvesting.” 19.3 (2001): n. pag. Print.

Greenberg, Jane. “Metadata Generation: Processes, People and Tools.” 29.2 (2003): n. pag.

---. “Understanding Metadata and Metadata Schemas.” Metadata: A Cataloger’s Primer. Ed. Richard Smiraglia. The Haworth Information, 2006. Print.

Greenstein, D., and S.E. Thorin. The Digital Library: A Biography. Washington: Digital Library Federation Council on Library and Information Resources, 2005. Print.

Groenewald, Ria, and Amelia Breytenbach. “The use of metadata and preservation methods for continuous access to digital data.” 29.2 (2011): n. pag. Print.

Guerrini, Mauro. Gli archivi istituzionali. Open access, valutazione della ricerca e diritto d’autore. Milano: Editrice Bibliografica, 2010. Print.

Hillmann, Diane. Using Dublin Core. 2005. Print.

Hillmann, Diane, Naomi Dushay, and Jon Phipps. “Improving metadata quality: augmentation and recombination.” Proceedings of the 2004 international conference on Dublin Core and metadata applications: metadata across languages and cultures. 2004. Print.

Hodge, Gail. “Metadata for electronic information resources: From variety to interoperability.” 25.1 (2005): n. pag.

Howarth, Lynne C. “Metadata and bibliographic control: Soul-mates or two solitudes?” 40.3-4 (2005): n. pag. Print.

Information Technology Identification and Mapping of Various Categories of Jurisdictional Domains. 2002. Print.

Information Technology- Metadata registries (MDR). 2004. Print.

Information technology Metadata Registry Interoperability and Bindings (MDRIB). 2008.

Information Technology Procedures for Achieving Metadata Registry Content Consistency. 2003. Print.

International Federation of Library Association. 2011. Print.

International Standard Bibliographic Description for Electronic Resources. 1997. Print.

Jones, Wayne. “Cataloging the Web: Metadata, AACR, and MARC 21.” 10 (2002): n. pag. Print.

Jorgensen, Poul H. “Practical application of FRBR and RDF.” 2001. Print.

Keßler, M. Linked Open Data of the German National Library. ECO4r Workshop “LOD of DNB.” Berlin: Deutsche National Bibliotek, 2010. Print.

Krichel, Thomas. ReDIF v.1. 2000. Print.

Kurth, Martin, David Ruddy, and Nathan Rupp. “Repurposing MARC metadata: using digital project experience to develop a metadata management design.” 22.2 (2004): n. pag. Print.

Lagoze, Carl. “The Warwick Framework: A Container Architecture for Diverse Sets of Metadata.” (1996): n. pag. Print.

Matei, Dan, and Peter Noerr. “User benefits for a new bibliographic model: follow-up the IFLA functional requirements study.” 1998. Print.

Myers, Jack. Metadata Ontology Language. 20112008. Print.

Nilsson, Mikael. From Interoperability to Harmonization in Metadata. Standardization Designing an Evolvable Framework for Metadata Harmonization. KTH School of Computer Science and Communication. Stockholm, Sweden, 2010. Print.

Palma, Raul, Jens Hartmann, and A. Gomez-Perez. Towards an Ontology Metadata Standard. 2007. Print.

Powell, A. et al. DCMI Abstract Model. 2007.

Records, IFLA Study Group on the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic. Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records: Final report. München: Saur, 1998. Print.

De Robbio, Antonella. Archivi aperti e comunicazione scientifica. Napoli: ClioPress, 2007. Print.

De Robbio, Antonella, and Silvia Giacomazzi. “Dati aperti con LODe.” 14.2 (2011): n. pag.

Shotton, David, and Silvio Peroni. FaBiO, the FRBR-aligned Bibliographic Ontology. 2011. Print.

Smiraglia, Richard. “Introducing Metadata.” Metadata: A Cataloger’s Primer. Ed. Richard Smiraglia. Haworth Information, 2006. Print.

Sompel, Herbert Van de, Thomas Krichel, and Michael L. Nelson. “The UPS Prototype. An Experimental End-User Service across E-Print Archives.” 6.2 (2000): n. pag.

Subirats, I., C. Nicolai, and N. Waltham. FRBR/FAO Model Implementation and Benefits at ASIST Annual Meeting 2010: Information for Submission. 2010. Print.

Text Encoding Initiative. 2011. Print.

Tillett, Barbara. “AACR2 and metadata: Library opportunities in the global semantic web.” 36.3-4 (2003): n. pag. Print.

---. FRBR: A Conceptual Model for the Bibliographic Universe. 2004. Print.

UNIMARC to MARC 21 Conversion Specifications Prepared for the Network Development and MARC Standards Office Library of Congress. 2001. Print.

Universal Bibliographic Control and International MARC Core Activity. 2009. Print.

Valkeapää, Onni, Olli Alm, and Eero Hyvönen. “Efficient Content Creation on the Semantic Web Using Metadata Schemas with Domain Ontology Services (System Description).” Proceedings of the 4th European conference on The Semantic Web: Research and Applications. Springer, 2007. Print.

VRA, v.3.0. Visual Recourse Association’s Core Categories. 2000. Print.

Weibel, Stuart. Approval of initial Dublin Core interoperability qualifiers. 2002. Print.

Weibel, Stuart, and Traugott Koch. “The Dublin Core Metadata Initiative: mission, current activities, and future directions.” 6.12 (2000): n. pag.

Weinstein, Peter C. “Ontology-Based Metadata:Transforming the MARC Legacy.” Proceedings of the Third ACM Digital Library conference. 1998. Print.

Woodley, Mary. DCMI Glossary. Dublin Core Metadata Initiative. 2003. Print.

Zhuhadar, L., O. Nasraoui, et al. “Metadata as seeds for building an ontology driven information retrieval system.” 6.3 (2009): n. pag.

Zhuhadar, Leyla, Olfa Nasraoui, et al. “Metadata as seeds for building an ontology driven information retrieval systems.” 6.3 (2009): n. pag.


Article Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Metrics powered by PLOS ALM

Refbacks



Copyright (c) 2011 Iryna Solodovnik

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Logo Università di FirenzeJLIS.it is published by Università di Firenze, Dipartimento di Storia, Archeologia, Geografia, Arte e Spettacolo (SAGAS) and hosted by University of Macerata, CSIA (Italy).

ISSN: 2038-1026

Openaire Logo DOAJ seal