July

20

06

Andy Powell, Eduserv Foundationandy.powell@eduserv.org.uk

www.eduserv.org.uk/foundation

Repository Roadmap – technical issues

July 2006JISC / CNI Conference, York

Where are we now?

• repository interoperability supported by– use of OAI-PMH to exchange metadata

– use of HTTP to exchange full-text

• however, no widely agreed mechanisms for getting stuff into repositories

• metadata is largely ‘simple DC’ (or LOM in the case of learning objects)

• some expectation for growing use of ‘complex objects’, i.e. bundles of stuff

• embryonic forms of linking between eprints and data

July 2006JISC / CNI Conference, York

Where are we now?

• strategies for assigning identifiers to content variable across repositories

– e.g. identifiers assigned and exposed at ‘work’, and ‘manifestation’ levels

– difficult to reliably move from metadata to full text

• little use of explicit ‘machine-readable’ licences– though note widespread interest in Creative Commons

• limited integration with institutional or national single sign-on mechanisms

– particularly important where we expect to see repositories used across and between institutions

July 2006JISC / CNI Conference, York

Where do we want to be?

• need to put agreements in place about…– using qualified DC to describe ‘eprints’

– ‘complex object’ model for use across resource types• note tension between being generic and being useful!

– mechanisms for instantiating ‘complex object’ model in XML

– how/when identifiers are assigned to entities in the complex objects

– handling citations between eprints and data

– e-Framework ‘Service Usage Model’ for repositories (i.e. what APIs should a repository expose to applications in the outside world?)

July 2006JISC / CNI Conference, York

Where do we want to be?

• better integration of repository content into the services people actually use (i.e. Google, etc.)

• better integration of repositories into access management approaches such as Shibboleth

• encourage more consistent approach to licensing of ‘open access’ material

– preferably in machine-readable way

July 2006JISC / CNI Conference, York

DC Eprints application profile

• JISC funded work to develop a qualified DC application profile for describing ‘eprints’

• work being led by– Julie Allinson, UKOLN, University of Bath

– Andy Powell, Eduserv Foundation

• with input from a range of contributors – primarily in the UK

http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/repositories/digirep/index/Eprints_Application_Profilehttp://www.ukoln.ac.uk/repositories/digirep/index/Eprints_Application_Profile

July 2006JISC / CNI Conference, York

FRBR as model

• application profile recognises that eprints are essentially complex bibliographic objects

• uses FRBR as basis for the ‘eprint’ model– i.e. using Work, Expression, Manifestation, Item and

Person/Organisation as key entities in the model

• uses Dublin Core ‘description sets’ as mechanism for capturing multiple descriptions about each of these entities

– ‘description sets’ part of the Dublin Core Abstract Model

– DCMI still finalising recommendations for encoding description sets in XML and RDF

July 2006JISC / CNI Conference, York

Sounds complicated?

• complexity in model necessary to capture– ‘is adaptation of’ type relationships between works

– ‘is translation of’ and ‘is version of’ type relationships between expressions

– ‘is format of’ type relationships between manifestations

– ‘is copy of’ type relationships between items

• gives enough richness to make– informed ‘appropriate copy’ decisions

– sense of ‘old fashioned’ citations between expressions and ‘new fangled’ hypertext links between items

– reliably move from metadata to full-text

• complexity in model invisible to end-user

July 2006JISC / CNI Conference, York

Where next?

• eprints application profile not an alternative to discussion about complex objects

• but FRBR helpful in understanding those objects

• JISC-funded work near to completion

• need to share with wider audience

• use of FRBR in this way is ‘novel’ – needs critical analysis

• intention is to do some of this thru Dublin Core working groups (e.g. at DC-2006 conference)

• note: XML encoding still awaiting finalisation of encoding guidelines by DCMI

July 2006JISC / CNI Conference, York

Questions?