WP3 Further specification of Functionality and Interoperability

WP3 Objectives (1)

• Continue the work of EDLnet WP2

• Co-ordinate the various projects aiming to deliver content and technology to Europeana v1

• through additional concertation and work group meetings• with invitations to WP and task leaders in EuropeanaConnect and

other projects in the Europeana group of projects• to ensure good integration of services and structures

• Proactive engagement with the various communities• site visits and focused meetings

WP3 Objectives (2)

• Continue to concentrate on three main aspects of interoperability

• basic semantic interoperability• the modelling and exchange of information objects and their

surrogates (including ingest and distribution/output issues)• technical and architectural interoperability with external

applications and components and their integration in Europeana

• Responsible for the architectural design of Europeana version 1

• Prototyping of new functionalities

• Deliver functional specifications to WP4

WP3 Tasks

• Work groups to gather requirements, build consensus• WG 3.1 Object Model and Metadata• WG 3.2 Semantic and multilingual aspects• WG 3.3 Architecture and components, external interaction • Technology watch

• Liaison with other projects and various communities• Site visits and focused meetings, Core expert groups

• Recommendations for further developments (3-yr horizon)

• Europeana functional specifications• Synchronize with EuropeanaConnect (API!) and other projects,

deliver specifications, “sandbox” to validate scalability and maturity

WP3 team

WP leaders (external)

• Makx Dekkers• Coordination, working groups

• Stefan Gradmann• Liaison, recommendations

• Mats Lindquist• Requirements, validation

• Carlo Meghini• Specifications, prototyping

• Europeana Office• Catherine Lupovici, Office WP

leader

• Julie Verleyen, scientific coordination across projects

• Go Sugimoto, Robina Clayphan, interoperability expertise

• Sjoerd Siebinga, multilingual expertise

• Others• Bram van der Werf (WP4) and

development team in strong connection with WG3.3

Comparison to EDLnet

• Continuing work in work groups, slightly rearranged – main platform for generation of ideas and achievement of cross-domain consensus

• Addition of WP3 Core Group on specific issues – people with key expertise who can commit to active contribution

• Separation of activities: specifications and verification in WP3, development and production of ingestion in WP4

• Sandbox for experimenting to verify that solutions are scalable and sufficiently stable for production

• Baseline and starting point: D2.5 deliverable from EDLnet

WP3 Core Group

• Oren Beit-Arie, ExLibris, USA

• Emmanuelle Bermés, Bibliothèque nationale de France

• Lorcan Dempsey, OCLC Inc., USA

• Martin Doerr, Foundation for Research and Technology Hellas, Greece

• Michael Fingerhut, Institut de Recherche et Coordination Acoustique/Musique, France

• Antoine Isaac, Vrije Universiteit, Netherlands

• Paolo Manghi, CNR/ISTI, Italy

• Alistair Miles, e-Science Centre, UK

• Marco de Niet, Digitaal Erfgoed Nederland, Netherlands

• Christian-Emil Ore, University of Oslo, Norway

• Vivien Petras, Humboldt University, Germany

• Daniel Pitti, University of Virginia, USA

• Andy Powell, EduServ Foundation, UK

• Vassilis Tzouvaras, National Technical University of Athens, Greece

• Herbert van de Sompel, Los Alamos National Laboratory, USA

• Theo van Veen, Koninklijke Bibliotheek, Netherlands

Deliverables and timeline

• Review functional requirements for Europeana V1 – May 09• Functional specifications for Rhine release – September 09

• Realistic subset of functional specifications wish list

• Functional specifications for Danube release – July 2010• Further functional specifications wish list

• Initial Technical and Logical Architecture and future work recommendations – July 2010

• Final Technical and Logical Architecture and future work recommendations – July 2011

• Work group meetings: 2-3 April, 14-16 September 2009, further meetings to be planned (6 in total)

WP3 Further specification of Functionality and InteroperabilityWork Group 3.1 Object model and Metadata

Makx Dekkers

Surrogate Model EDLnet D2.5

External Objects and Contexts

Real-world physical object

Digital primary object

Digital representation object

Digital Surrogate Object and Context

Issues for Work Group WG3.1

• Object model: • which types of objects need to be included in the surrogate model

(physical, digital, landing pages etc.), which relationships are important to include?

• Metadata issues:• how are the various types of objects described (structures, fields,

standards, vocabularies) and how could/should metadata be improved?

• Functional issues:• what services should be provided for the different object types and

how should this be presented to the user?

WP3 Further specification of Functionality and InteroperabilityWork Group 3.2 Semantic and Multilingual Aspects

Issues for Work Group WG3.2:Some Principles

• Europeana surrogates need rich semantic context in (at least)

• Place, Time, Persons, Abstract Concepts

• The graphs linking surrogates and semantic nodes need to be typed

• We will use linked data wherever possible instead of creating our own semantic nodes

• Source data and their context will be in all European languages (and potentially more!)

• Europeana users will wish to use all European languages (and potentially more!)

WG3.2: Semantic Contextualisation and Multilingual Issues

Issues for Work Group WG3.2: Semantic Contextualisation (1)

• What kind of functionality based on semantic technology do we actually want to enable (have a look at the thoughtlab and develop ideas from there)? Do we want to enable logical inferencing, for instance?

• What source data do we actually have (subject headings, classifications, thesauri) and how well are objects contextualised in source data?

• What kinds of semantic elements will we be able to produce from these via SKOSification or other automated procedures?

• Which linked data resources will we be using?

Issues for Work Group WG3.2: Semantic Contextualisation (2)

• To what extent will we be able to automatically contextualise surrogates in linking them to semantic nodes?

• What types of links between surrogates and nodes do we distinguish?

• What may providers expect to get back from us?

• What technology do we need for all this• RDF? SKOS?? OWL???

• What input does Europeana.Connect (EuCo) WP1 expect from us and when?

• What do we expect back from EuCo WP1 and when?

• Any related projects? Results we can reuse??

Issues for Work Group WG3.2Multilingual Issues

• What is a realistic scope for multilingual functionality: • query translation? • Result set translation?? • More???

• Which languages will Europeana 1.0 support?

• What input does EuCo WP2 expect from us and when?

• What do we expect back from EuCo WP2 and when do we expect this?

• Any related projects? Results we can reuse??

WP3 Further specification of Functionality and InteroperabilityWork Group 3.3 Prototypes and the sandbox

The Challenge

• Europeana faces very difficult technical problems• Integrating heterogeneous data• Offering advanced functionality• Achieving high quality, e.g. scalability

• Lots of experts on board and in the proximity• One Core Group with 15+ external experts• 3 working groups with domain-specific experts• Other projects working very close• DL.org• … and possibly more

• How to enable contribution from such a large group?

EuropeanaLabs

• EuropeanaLabs!

• A development infrastructure with test-suites of high quality data for creating, testing and evaluating innovative solutions for Europeana

• Development environment for rapid prototyping• Large high quality data collection• Sandboxes for experimenting prototypes on real data for

• Effectiveness

• Efficiency

• and benchmarking for• Scalability

EuropeanaLabs

• We aim at creating a forum which will enable the scientific communities around Europeana to contribute the highest quality solutions

• Many types of customers:• Europeanav1.0 and neighbor projects• External customers:

• "My algorithm here is a lot smarter than yours"

• "My algorithm might be useful for you, but I'm not sure"

• "I have an idea"

• EuropeanaLabs will use the enormous effort spent for setting up Europeana to advance the state of the art in Digital Libraries

WP3 Further specification of Functionality and InteroperabilityThank you