OCLC Research @ U of Calgary: New directions for metadata workflows across libraries, archives, museums
•Descargar como PPT, PDF•
3 recomendaciones•1,147 vistas
Presentation used as scene setting for 2 days worth of discussion around library, archive & museum convergence, metadata workflows and single search at the University of Calgary.
Recomendados
Recomendados
Más contenido relacionado
La actualidad más candente
La actualidad más candente (20)
Similar a OCLC Research @ U of Calgary: New directions for metadata workflows across libraries, archives, museums
Similar a OCLC Research @ U of Calgary: New directions for metadata workflows across libraries, archives, museums (20)
Más de OCLC Research
Más de OCLC Research (20)
Último
Último (20)
OCLC Research @ U of Calgary: New directions for metadata workflows across libraries, archives, museums
- 1. Scene setting: New directions for metadata workflows across libraries, archives, museums G ünter Waibel Karen Smith -Yoshimura Merrilee Proffitt Thom Hickey University of Calgary February 10 th 2010
- 2. Taylor Family Digital Library
- 3. Sheila Cannell Director, Library Services University of Edinburgh LAM: Campus Context
- 4. Sheila Cannell Director, Library Services University of Edinburgh “ I'm really quite convinced that what we have to do is to boost up the whole area of what would be called the intellectual capital of the university, which I think happens within our special collections, within our archives (both those that are older and those that are being created now), and in our museums. I'm really interested in how we reposition the traditional library into that more general area.” LAM: Campus Context
- 5. Anne Van Camp Director, Smithsonian Institution Archives LAM: Opportunity & Challenge
- 6. Anne Van Camp Director, Smithsonian Institution Archives LAM: Opportunity & Challenge We are 19 museums, 9 research centers that are scattered across the world, we have 18 different archives, we have 1 library, but that library has 20 branches, and we have 1 zoo. So it's a rather complicated place, and you can imagine the challenge we face in trying to bring all of this disparate information together.
- 7. OCLC Research LAM Workshops Princeton Smithsonian Victoria & Albert U of Edinburgh Yale
- 8. Beth McKillop Keeper of Asia , Victoria & Albert Museum One Search
- 9. Beth McKillop Keeper of Asia , Victoria & Albert Museum “ The William Morris question remains with us. How do you show what the V&A has to offer to students interested in William Morris: designs by William Morris, archival materials by William Morris, and library books about William Morris.” Single Search
- 11. Yale Office of Digital Assets and Infrastructure (ODAI) slide courtesy of Meg Bellinger,Ann Green, Louis E. King Yale University's Model for Campus-wide Digital Content Strategy and Implementation (CNI 2009) www.cni.org/tfms/2009b.fall/Presentations/cni_yale_bellinger.pdf
- 15. New Directions for Metadata Workflows Karen Smith-Yoshimura [email_address] OCLC Research University of Calgary February 10, 2010
- 18. Materials handled 78% handle both published and unpublished items
- 19. Types of materials described
- 23. 45% build and maintain one or more local thesaurus (especially archives, museums, institutional repositories, digital libraries)
- 24. Image: from the end of “Raiders of the Lost Ark” Who knows what’s hidden in our collections?
- 25. What percentage of your collection do you estimate has not been adequately described – and is unlikely to be described without additional resources, funding, or both? RLG Programs Descriptive Metadata Practices Survey Results: Data Supplement http://www.oclc.org/programs/publications/reports/2007-04.pdf 18% 35% 24% 22%
- 26. Sharing guidelines and strategies with other units
- 28. Crosswalks between schemas used (70% have conversion tools)
- 32. Harnessing the power of terminologies Merrilee Proffitt [email_address] OCLC Research University of Calgary February 10, 2010
- 43. Names, Identities Hub, VIAF, WorldCat Identities Thom Hickey [email_address] OCLC Research University of Calgary February 10, 2010
- 44. Names touch everything…. Authors Publishers Institutions Musicians Families Government agencies Artists Fictional characters Actors Plant discoverers Corporations Pseudonyms Illustrators Editors Translators Correspondents Historical figures Directors Scientists Architects Animals Politicians Inventors Associations Cartographers
- 47. Networking Names Advisory Group
- 52. One persona, many representations http://viaf.org/viaf/95216565
Notas del editor
- This presentation is our round-about way of introducing ourselves, as well as the focus on integration for this visit. We hope that sharing some of the things we work on which might be pertinent to your quest will appropriately set the scene for the discussion sessions to follow.
- The University of Calgary’s Library & Cultural Resources is in the midst of attempting something bold and daring: integrating its diverse units which collect, manage and share cultural knowledge into a coherent whole. This inspired vision has its physical manifestation in the Taylor Family Digital Library building emerging in the heart of campus, and its intellectual expression in the teams which issued reports charting a path into the future.
- The University of Calgary is in the vanguard of convergence, and I predict that other institutions will look to you for guidance and leadership. That’s the good news. The bad news: Since you are in the vanguard, there are no blueprints for how to achieve your aspirations of integration. However, there is comfort in knowing that there are some fellow travelers who have taken stock of their situation and come to similar conclusions about the necessity for convergence, and a renewed emphasis on rare and unique materials. Here is one of those fellow travelers, Sheila Cannell from the University of Edinburgh.
- [play audio, 0:29]
- Here is another voice from the forefront of convergence, just to make you feel a little bit better about your challenges. This is Anne Van Camp explaining the challenge faced by the Smithsonian Institution.
- [Play soundfile 0:23]
- Both the Smithsonian and the University of Edinburgh were among the institutions where OCLC Research held library, archive and museum convergence workshops in 2007/2008. (You can see the rest of the institutions we worked with on the slide.) The stated goal for these workshops was to learn about existing collaborations, and catalyze even deeper working relationships among the LAMs at these campus (or campus-like) institutions. As I could tell from the citations in your documents, many of you have read the report which summarized the findings from these workshops. The way we have structured some of our discussions today has been informed by what we’ve learned in these five all-day events.
- One of the clearest message we took away from the workshops: every single one of the institutions we visited grappled with what we wound up calling “one search”: the idea that a user should be able to determine with a single search which materials on a given individual or topic were held in campus collections. This is how Beth McKillop from the V&A frames the question. [See also Ricky’s blog posting at http://hangingtogether.org/?p=410]
- [play audio 0:14]
- The Victoria & Albert has invested a good amount of work into single search – on the slide, you’ll see a systems diagram showing how the information from their archives, museum and library collection flows together. The initial objective for this system was to use it as support for Visitor Service staff to answer inquiries such as the William Morris question.
- Yale University, another graduate from our workshop series, has also made ambitious plans to turn the “Information Silos of the 20 th century” into an integrated “21 st Century Scholarly Ecosystem”. These activities is facilitated by the Office of Digital Assets and Infrastructure (ODAI), and include…
- … cross collections discovery for the three major museums on Yale campus and the University Library. Their strategy for integration creates a central database of university assets by harvesting collections using Open Archives Initiative (OAI) Protocol for Metadata Harvesting (PMH). The museums in particular like this strategy since outfitting them as OAI data content providers empowers them not only to share data for Yale campus-wide integration, but also with other aggregators such as ARTstor.
- In November, the Smithsonian launched a new website called “Collections Search Center”, a search service bringing together 2 million records and 265K multimedia files from 45 Smithsonian units. The Smithsonian Office of the Chief Information Officer played a key role in coordinating the units and putting the technology for this single search across Smithsonian collections in place. To support the Collection Search Center, the created a centralized metadata index plus a set of web services that can search, access and display metadata and derivatives of digital assets held within the Smithsonian’s major collections.
- And, of course, the University of Calgary is also investigating single search across all campus collections. We’re eager to learn more from you what role Summon can play in bringing resources together, and what your plans are for a converged future. We hope that the agenda for our two days together will instigate a broad discussion about how to best leverage library, archive and museum resource for teaching and learning on campus.
- Responses received from libraries, archives, museums, special collections, institutional repositories, digital library programs. Responses included four of the RLG Partners that participated in the LAM workshops .
- 86 responses
- 86 responses
- Manuscripts, archives, ephemera, photographs, postcards, scrapbooks, clippings files, maps, architectural records -- So many of our special collections are hidden in boxes in warehouses. No one knows what’s there.
- In 2007 we conducted a survey of 18 large RLG partner institutions that had multiple centers of “metadata creation” that were already reported to be working together in some degree – libraries, archives, museums, digital libraries, etc - . within one campus. Of the 73 responses, almost half said that over 31% of their collections were inadequately described, and unlikely to be without further funding. The breakdown by unit type is more striking – most museums said that half or more of their collections were inadequately described, and a third of the archival collections. (Library technical services responses had the best described collections – only 18% responded half or more.) OCLC just launched a comprehensive survey of special collections and archives in academic and research libraries - following up on the ARL survey back in 1998. The director of every library that belongs to the RLG Partnership in the U.S. or Canada, ARL, CARL (Canada), IRLA, and the Oberlin Group received a copy. Will the percentages of inadequately described collections differ much from what we see here? (Results will be published in mid-2010.)
- Owners and creators of terminologies such at the Library of Congress (Library of Congress Subject Headings, Thesaurus for graphic materials, etc.), the J. Paul Getty Trust (Art & Architecture Thesaurus, etc), the National Library of Medicine (Medical Subject Headings), and the American Library Association (Guidelines On Subject Access To Individual Works Of Fiction, Drama, Etc), had invested decades of staff time and expertise in creating and maintaining vocabularies that aid in describing and defining materials held in cultural heritage institutions. In turn, libraries, archives, and museums have applied terms from these vocabularies to descriptions of items and collections in their care. So far, there has been no large-scale effort to leverage the power inherent in the structured vocabularies themselves, or to the terms that have been applied in the descriptive process. Demonstrator project that will hopefully show the possibilities for leveraging terminologies and inspire further work in this area. Harness the inherent power in these structured vocabularies: preferred terms, alternative terms, deprecated terms, related terms, broader terms, narrower terms, translations (in multilingual vocabularies). Relationships for a concept/heading can expresss equivalence, hierarchy, or association.
- Libraries archives museums represented Small and large, publically and privately funded Range of functional roles: books catalogers, visual materials catalogers, art librarians, archivists, those that deal with digital materials. Strawman: Metadata creation Search optimization Support terminologies management (including maintaining local terms) Support “social” terminologies: collaborative editing and creation; contribution of data by non library experts. Value added intelligence (creating relationships between terminologies) Each asked to present strawman to 3-4 “like” colleagues at different institutions to sift and sort what would be most useful.
- In each environment, the web service will be used to expand users’ search terms, by exploiting terminologies. The institution will provide the users’ search term to the web service, and the web service will return a list of results (in XML) that will include terms that “relate” to the users search term; results may include deprecated, narrower, broader, or related terms that are usually not embedded in a resource description. The XML results can be used at the discretion of the institution (to expand a user’s search terms automatically; to offer additional, related term for the user to use, etc.).
- Names and Identities Smith-Yoshimura & Hickey
- Names and Identities Smith-Yoshimura & Hickey
- Names and Identities Smith-Yoshimura & Hickey
- Names and Identities Smith-Yoshimura & Hickey
- Names and Identities Smith-Yoshimura & Hickey