Moving from a locally-developed
data model to a standard
conceptual model
Jenn Riley
Metadata Librarian
Indiana University Digital Library Program
2
International Society for
Knowledge Organization
August 6, 2008
I’m a practitioner.
• And a librarian.
• But I work in a department whose mission is to
advance the state of the art in digital libraries,
• and I’m particularly interested in innovative
discovery systems.
Therefore, I often act as a bridge between the
researcher and the implementer.
3
International Society for
Knowledge Organization
August 6, 2008
Libraries’ metadata focus
• Practical!
• Element sets and the records that implement them
• Metadata element sets tend to be defined by their
encodings
▫ Rarely do element sets from this community have
multiple encodings
▫ Rarely is there an externally defined model on which
the encoding is based
• Only recently has this community started thinking
about conceptual models
4
International Society for
Knowledge Organization
August 6, 2008
Some conceptual models
• FRBR: Functional Requirements for
Bibliographic Records, 1998 report from the
International Federation of Library Associations
and Institutions (IFLA)
• CIDOC CRM: International Committee for
Museum Documentation Conceptual Reference
Model, ISO 21127:2006
• DCMI Abstract Model, 2007
▫ “Information model”
▫ At a higher level of abstraction than the first two
5
International Society for
Knowledge Organization
August 6, 2008
What’s the connection?
• Significant literature on both topics, but they
rarely reference one another
• Should also note that the categories “element
set” and “conceptual model” don’t have strict
boundaries
• Does a metadata element set need to be
explicitly based on a conceptual model?
• What does it even mean for an element set to
conform to a conceptual model?
6
International Society for
Knowledge Organization
August 6, 2008
What the community has realized
• An element set necessarily instantiates an
underlying conceptual model
▫ Even if it’s not explicitly defined
▫ Even if it’s internally inconsistent, or not really
what was intended
• The conceptual model has a profound effect on
what can be done with the metadata, and what
can be described with it
• Mapping between element sets easier when they
use the same conceptual model
7
International Society for
Knowledge Organization
August 6, 2008
DCMI leading work in this area
• DCMES, 1995
• Warwick Framework (format-independent
container architecture) and slight revisions, 1996
• Introduction of qualifiers in 2000
• DCMI Abstract Model
▫ First draft 2004
▫ Current version June 2007
• Encodings
▫ Have changed over time
▫ DCMI has long presented several options
▫ Now will be explicitly connected to the Abstract Model
• Libraries should learn from this development
8
International Society for
Knowledge Organization
August 6, 2008
Applying these principles to
Variations @ Indiana University
• Variations Digital Music Library in operation since 1995
▫ Streaming audio
▫ Scanned scores, and a few encoded scores
• Work-based data model developed in 2001
▫ Defined as a human-readable data dictionary
▫ Data structured as XML inside the system
▫ XML Schema for Java classes to interact with not developed
until 2005
• Current work focused on long-term sustainability
▫ Locally-developed data model is a liability
▫ FRBR gaining real traction in the library community
▫ It became obvious we needed a change, and one based on
conformance to a standard conceptual model
9
International Society for
Knowledge Organization
August 6, 2008
Original Variations data model
10
International Society for
Knowledge Organization
August 6, 2008
Variations vs. FRBR
Variations 2/3 Entity
FRBR Group 1 Entity
Work
(more concrete than FRBR Work)
Work
Instantiation
Expression
(can only appear on one Container)
Container
(includes some copy-specific data)
Manifestation
Media Object
(defined as a digital file)
Item
11
International Society for
Knowledge Organization
August 6, 2008
Current status of our work
• Reports analyzing FRBR/FRAD as applied to music
▫
▫
▫
▫
Music-specific entity definitions
Attributes needed/not needed
Relationships needed/not needed
Additions to FRBR/FRAD needed
• Currently investigating encodings
▫ No data structure from IFLA, and other library bodies
haven’t stepped up
▫ Internal data representation vs. export formats
• Pending grant application for development work to
perform the switch – stay tuned!
12
International Society for
Knowledge Organization
August 6, 2008
Encodings under consideration (1)
• FRBR in RDF
▫ Researcher-driven
▫ No stable body behind it
▫ Only covers entities and relationships, not attributes
• FRBRoo
▫ “Harmonization” of FRBR and CIDOC/CRM
▫ Limits Events to those for Group 1 entities
▫ “Electronic publishing” model doesn’t include a
Manifestation
▫ No OWL ontology for FRBRoo yet, only for
CIDOC/CRM
13
International Society for
Knowledge Organization
August 6, 2008
Encodings under consideration (2)
• Music Ontology
▫ Scope considerably wider than what Variations
needs
▫ Lacks model for FRBR Group 3 entities
• DCMI/RDA Vocabularies
▫ Because RDA is FRBR-based
▫ But likely not close enough to FRBR for us
• So we may have to make our own
▫ But would still export some of these other
alternatives
14
International Society for
Knowledge Organization
August 6, 2008
Thank you!
• Let’s find more ways for researchers and
practitioners to work together.
• Questions?
• For more information:
▫ [email protected]
▫ These presentation slides:
http://www.dlib.indiana.edu/~jenlrile/presentations/
isko2008/isko2008.ppt