Open, social and linked - what do current Web trends tell us about the future of digital libraries?

Sep

tem

ber 2

00

9

Andy Powell, [email protected]

www.eduserv.org.uk/researchtwitter.com/andypowe11

Advanced Technologiesfor Digital Libraries 2009

Trento, ItalySeptember 2009

Open, social and linked

What do current Web trends tell us about the future of digital libraries?

September 2009AT4DL09 - Trento, Italy 2

the purpose of this talk is to ask some questions about the future of digital libraries


that’s not because I think current digital library thinking is wrong


but because I think it is healthy to ask those kind of questions every so often


JISC Information Environment


Dublin Core Metadata Initiative


linked data, social networks and digital identity


I hope I have something useful to say

but we’ll see!


I’m going to focus on the three words in the title as core themes for this talk


open


social


linked


digital library content should be not just “on” the Web but “of” the Web


Huh? What does

of the Web

actually, like, mean?


an attitude


an expectation that your content will be re-used in ways you didn’t anticipate


an expectation that people will take your content, your API and URLs and use them to build

something different


so let’s take a step back for a minute


where are we coming from?


uk-centric


and specific to higher education


jisc ie diagram


focus on the content


primarily ‘document-like objects’


focus on describing the content (primarily using simple Dublin Core metadata)


and on moving that metadata from providers to consumers


for the purposes of resource discovery, access and use


being ‘open’ is all about enabling re-use


but the cultural conditions for open sharing and re-use don’t necessarily emerge overnight


as we have found with learning objects


and we are likely to find with research data


UKRDS survey of staff representing 700 researchers...

43% expressed need to see other’s research data

most share data in some form (informally with peers)

but only 12% share via existing formal data centres


and even in the case of scholarly publications (where there is an existing heritage of ‘sharing’ for ‘re-use’) cultural change towards deposit is

only happening very slowly


I also wonder if there’s a generational attitude to ‘openness’ which tends to assume most things

digital are ‘open’?


so even things that are very definitely not open, like most music for example, are often treated

as though they are


anyway, I digress...

back to the JISC Information Environment


we tend to talk about the OAI-PMH, Z39.50, SRW/SRU, OpenURL, Dublin Core and so on


much of the content is provided commercially


so there is also a focus on mechanisms to protect content from inappropriate access


in the JISC Information Environment there is an implied flow


jisc ie diagram


the JISC IE says very little about the relationships between people and content


and nothing about relationships between people


it says nothing about the social use that grows around content


it talks about identifiers for stuff


but not about identity (of people)


this is not unusual for ‘digital library’ activities


we talk a lot about content, and data formats, and metadata, and curation, and preservation, and

persistent identifiers, and …


and we talk about openness, and Creative Commons, and other open licences


and these things are all very good and important


but we don’t talk much about social networks


which is a shame…


because... “cultural heritage results from EXCHANGE OF IDEAS about objects - it is not located IN them”

tweeted by @janestevenson from the #soa09 conference, quoting Marc Bouley of the University of St Andrews


and while we have been busy building digital library initiatives like the JISC Information

Environment


the Web has changed under our feet


it’s increasingly participatory


it’s increasingly about user-generated content


it’s increasingly open


it’s increasingly social


it’s increasingly linked


all very much open, social and linked


3 other things are also worth noting about these services...


firstly, concentration

Lorcan Dempsey, OCLC

http://orweblog.oclc.org/archives/001556.html


secondly, they are ‘of’ the Web

they support diffusion thru simple and open APIs, the use of RSS, cool URIs for everything of value, a

RESTful architectural approach, and so on...


in short... they see being mashed as a virtue


thirdly, identity (in these services) is not just concerned with questions like “who are you and

what are you allowed to do?”


but also about “this is me, this is who I know, and this is what I’ve created”


digital identity has become user-centric


concentration, diffusion and identity are enablers of social interaction


meanwhile... somewhere in academia

(a alternative case-study)


the open access

movement

and

scholarly repositories


a university-based institutional repository is a set of services that a university offers to the members of its community for the management and dissemination of digital materials created by the institution and its community members. It is most essentially an organizational commitment to the stewardship of these digital materials, including long-term preservation where appropriate, as well as organization and access or distribution. … An institutional repository is not simply a fixed set of software and hardware

(Cliff Lynch, 2003)


scholarly publications

learning objects

research data


manage

deposit

disclose

make openly available

curate

preserve


largely institutional focus

interoperability through centralised aggregators (national and global)

harvesting metadata about content using OAI-PMH (metadata = simple Dublin Core)


jisc ie diagram


we have tended to adopt service oriented approaches in line with long

tradition from Z39.50to SOAP/WSDL


our focus has been on building“services on content”

rather than on the“content” itself


we don’t tend to adopt a resource oriented approach


we don’t adopt REST – an architectural style with a focus on resources, their identifiers (e.g. URIs), and a simple

uniform set of operationsthat each resourcesupports (e.g. GET,PUT, POST, DELETE)


we don’t encourage aWeb style “follow your nose” approach


… and we tend to treat “content” in isolation from the “social networks” that need to grow around

that content


successful “repositories” (Flickr, YouTube, Slideshare, etc.) promote the social activity that

takes place around content as well as the content management and disclosure activity


the institutional approach has fundamental mismatch with the real-life social networks adopted by

researchers

subject-based

cross-institutional

global


while institutional approach isgood from perspective of institutional

management, preservation, etc.

globally “concentrated” repositories might better reflect the social networks that need to arise


the net effect …is that there is no net effect


repositories remain uncompelling places to disclose scholarly publications from POV of the

researcher


perceived cost of deposit remains higher than perceived benefits


we resort to institutional or funder mandates, “thou shalt deposit”, to fill what would

otherwise remain empty


final thoughts


visitors vs. residents

David White, University of Oxford

http://tallblog.conted.ox.ac.uk/index.php/2008/07/23/not-natives-immigrants-but-visitors-residents/


counterpoint to the whole ‘Google generation’, ‘digital native’ meme


resident – “an individual who lives a percentage of their life online”


visitor – “an individual who uses the web as a tool in an organised manner whenever the need

arises”


the cultural heritage sector tends to build services aimed at visitors


I think we should be designing with residents in mind


conclusions...


what would I do if I was advising on something like the JISC Information Environment now?


I’d aim to be as like the mainstream Web as possible


I’d ask “How would Google do this?” more often


I’d focus on the basics


I’d focus on the principles of linked data

http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/LinkedData.html


use URIs to name things


use HTTP URIs so that people can look them up


provide useful information when people dereference the URIs


include links to other things as part of that information (so that the recipient can find new

things)


I’d promote the principles of cool URIs

(practical persistence)


I’d strongly encourage a RESTful architectural approach


I’d encourage RSS / Atom as essential point of access


I’d focus on the social aspects of the systems being built


implies that the Open Stack (OpenID, OAuth, ...) is increasingly important


I’d focus on building stuff for residents rather than visitors


thank you

Open, social and linked - what do current Web trends tell us about the future of digital libraries?

Education

Transcript of Open, social and linked - what do current Web trends tell us about the future of digital libraries?