RDTF Metadata Guidelines: an update
Download as PPTX, PDF0 likes585 views
The document outlines the RDTF metadata guidelines aimed at helping libraries, museums, and archives expose and enhance their metadata for aggregator services while aligning with linked data principles. It discusses the integration of existing practices and emphasizes serving data through various approaches, including RDF, linked data, and HTML pages. Recommendations are provided for developing guidance on URI assignments, serving descriptions, and clarifying definitions of 'open' in the context of metadata usage.
More Related Content
Similar to RDTF Metadata Guidelines: an update (20)
More from Andy Powell (20)
![From Curiosity to ROI — Cost-Benefit Analysis of Agentic Automation [3/6]](https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/session-3-250903141006-a3917e1a-thumbnail.jpg?width=560&fit=bounds)
![Strategic Picks — Prioritising the Right Agentic Use Cases [2/6]](https://cdn.slidesharecdn.com/ss_thumbnails/session-2-250902135931-4c97717a-thumbnail.jpg?width=560&fit=bounds)
RDTF Metadata Guidelines: an update
- 1. RDTF Metadata Guidelinesan updateAndy Powell (and Pete Johnston)RDTF Management FrameworkProject Board29 March2011
- 2. Functional requirementhelp libraries, museums and archives expose existing metadata (and new metadata created using existing practice) in ways thatsupport the development of aggregator servicesintegrate well with the web (and the emerging web of data)note:RDTF is not about re-engineering cataloguing practice in the LAM sectors
- 3. Guiding principlessupport the RDTF Visioninformed by Paul Miller’s desk study reviewflow from the JISC IE Technical Review meetingin line with Linked Data principlesbased on the W3C Linked Open Data Star Schemein line with Designing URI Sets for the UK Public Sectortake into account the Europeana Data Model and ESEbe informed by mainstream web practice and search engine behaviour and be broadly in line with the notion of “making better websites” across the library, museum and archives sectors
- 4. Draft proposalused the W3C Linked Open Data star scheme as framework (at 3, 4 and 5 star levels)three approachescommunity formatsRDF dataLinked Data196 comments – on pretty much all aspects of the draft
- 5. Guiding principlessupport the RDTF Visioninformed by Paul Miller’s desk study reviewflow from the JISC IE Technical Review meetingin line with Linked Data principlesbased on the W3C Linked Open Data Star Schemein line with Designing URI Sets for the UK Public Sectortake into account the Europeana Data Model and ESEbe informed by mainstream web practice and search engine behaviour and be broadly in line with the notion of “making better websites” across the library, museum and archives sectorsWe probably failed in this!!
- 6. Re-conceptualising the guidelinesRDFNot-RDFIndividual ItemDescriptionsLinked Data“page per thing”Collectionsof Descriptions“RDF Data”“bulk download”
- 7. The draft guidelinesRDFNot-RDFIndividual ItemDescriptionsLinked Data“page per thing”Collectionsof Descriptions“RDF Data”“bulk download”
- 8. The Web!RDFNot-RDFIndividual ItemDescriptionsLinked Data“page per thing”Collectionsof Descriptions“RDF Data”“bulk download”
- 9. Possible adoption pathRDFNot-RDFIndividual ItemDescriptionsLinked Data“page per thing”Collectionsof Descriptions“RDF Data”“bulk download”
- 10. Bulk download“give us what you’ve got”serve existing community bulk-formats (e.g. files containing collections of MARC, MODS, BibTeX, DC/XML, SPECTRUM or EAD records) or CSV over RESTfulHTTPuse sitemaps and robots.txt and/or RSS/Atom to advertise availability and GZip for compressionfor CSV, providea column called ‘label’ or ‘title’ so we’ve got something to displaygive us separate records (for CSV, read ‘rows’) about separate resources (where you can)simples!
- 11. Page per thing“build better websites”serve an HTML page (i.e. a description) for every “thing” of interest over RESTful HTTPoptionally serve alternative format(s) for each description (e.g. a MODS or DC/XML record) at separate URIs and link from the HTML descriptions using “<link rel=“alternative” … />use “cool” ‘http’ URIs for all descriptionsuse sitemaps and robots.txt and/or RSS/Atom to advertise availabilityoptionally offer OAI-PMH server to allow harvesting of all descriptions/formats
- 12. RDF data“RDF bulk download”serve big buckets of RDF (as RDF/XML, N-Tuples or N-Quads) over RESTful HTTPre-use existing conceptual models and vocabularies where you canassign URIs to every “thing” of interestuse Semantic Sitemaps and the Vocabulary of Interlinked Datasets (VoID) to advertise availability of the buckets
- 13. Linked Data“W3C 5 star approach”serve HTML and RDF/RDFa for every “thing” of interest over RESTful HTTPassign‘http’ URIs to every “thing” (and every description of a thing)follow “cool URIs for the semantic web” recommended practicebecome part of the web of data - link to other people’s stuff using their URIs
- 14. Recommendationsuse the four-quadrant model to frame the guidelines (we think all four quadrants are useful, and that there should probably be some guidance on each area)develop specific guidance for serving an HTML page description per 'thing' of interest (possibly with associated, and linked, alternative formats such as DC/XML)develop (or find) specific guidance about how to sensibly assign persistent 'http' URIs to everything of interest (including both things and descriptions of things)
- 15. Also…that the definition of 'open' needs more work (particularly in the context of whether commercial use is allowed) but that this needs to be sensitive to not stirring up IPR-worries in those domains where they are less of a concern currentlythat mechanisms for making statements of provenance, licensing and versioning be developed where RDF triples are being made available (possibly in collaboration with Europeana work)that a fuller list of relevant models that might be adopted, the relationships between them, and any vocabularies commonly associated with them be maintained separately from the guidelines themselves
- 16. Fin