Table of Contents
Comments
Commenters1
This model is a mixture of the multiple schemas aggregation model and the linked data model. There is a central aggregator, with a common metadata schema guideline defined. Each of the content owners provides their metadata in their existing format together with their schema. The aggregator creates links between the schemas and metadata using linked data. An example of this is an aggregation project of the Communauté française de Belgique called PEPS, currently in pilot stage.
This model is a mixture of the multiple schemas aggregation model and the linked data model. There is a central aggregator, with a common metadata schema guideline defined. Each of the content owners provides their metadata in their existing format together with their schema. The aggregator creates links between the schemas and metadata using linked data. An example of this is an aggregation project of the Communauté française de Belgique called PEPS, currently in pilot stage.
3
Many other variations on the mixed model exist, with more or less focus on harmonisation of the central schema.
Many other variations on the mixed model exist, with more or less focus on harmonisation of the central schema.5
| Advantages | Disadvantages |
|
|
7
The pilot PEPS project is based on the premise that they don’t ask the institutions to change their way of managing and documenting their collections and they assume that the institutions have their own web site presenting them, their collections and each asset in their collection. The harvesting is through standard OAI-PMH but is defined explicitly in a document called the Harvesting Agreement (one per collection) split into two blocks:
The pilot PEPS project is based on the premise that they don’t ask the institutions to change their way of managing and documenting their collections and they assume that the institutions have their own web site presenting them, their collections and each asset in their collection. The harvesting is through standard OAI-PMH but is defined explicitly in a document called the Harvesting Agreement (one per collection) split into two blocks:8
- The metadata applicable to each of the assets of the collection (cataloguing the Cultural or Scientific asset) according to:
- A selection of the metadata terms as defined and used within the institution.
- The metadata terms as required for Europeana.
- The metadata terms as required for Athena.
10
- The CONTEXTS values applicable to the domain covered by the collection (each name instance is described by a small IT record card). List of names of instances of:
- Physical persons.
- Moral persons / Institutions / Organisations / Enterprises.
- Periods.
- Places.
- Events.
11
The Aggregation project team is undertaking the harmonisation task, which produces one Aggregation Agreement which contains harmonisation of:
The Aggregation project team is undertaking the harmonisation task, which produces one Aggregation Agreement which contains harmonisation of:12
- The description of the institutions and of the collections.
- The names of some of the terms covering identical/similar things between the collections (expressed as typed alias).
- The instances of metadata (e.g. W.A. Mozart; Mozart; Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart) (expressed as typed alias).
- The names of the instances of each class of context (expressed as typed alias).
13
The intention is to use a Semantic definition tool in such a way that the Harvesting Agreements and the Aggregation Agreement will be expressed in OWL, implemented on a simple RDF triples database and will include the alias. The aggregator will then exploit the harvested metadata and the Aggregation Agreement to make vertical (within a collection) and horizontal (context dependent between the collections) queries and other applications. At any moment, the users of the aggregator could click to be re-linked to the applicable item, within the Web services dedicated to the collection in the owner or deputy of the assets of the collection. The semantic database in this case is a fundamental element of the aggregation, used for the aggregation services to understand and make the link between the way of describing the item in a specific collection and the way of describing it in the view of aggregated services.
The intention is to use a Semantic definition tool in such a way that the Harvesting Agreements and the Aggregation Agreement will be expressed in OWL, implemented on a simple RDF triples database and will include the alias. The aggregator will then exploit the harvested metadata and the Aggregation Agreement to make vertical (within a collection) and horizontal (context dependent between the collections) queries and other applications. At any moment, the users of the aggregator could click to be re-linked to the applicable item, within the Web services dedicated to the collection in the owner or deputy of the assets of the collection. The semantic database in this case is a fundamental element of the aggregation, used for the aggregation services to understand and make the link between the way of describing the item in a specific collection and the way of describing it in the view of aggregated services.14
The migration to a full semantic network of the aggregator will be the subject of the project that would follow PEPs but the approach above ensures a progressive evolution (not revolution). The trick is the mapping onto the classes and instances of authority lists allowed by the aggregation and the harmonisation process.
The migration to a full semantic network of the aggregator will be the subject of the project that would follow PEPs but the approach above ensures a progressive evolution (not revolution). The trick is the mapping onto the classes and instances of authority lists allowed by the aggregation and the harmonisation process.15
Furthermore, there is also a pilot with three organisations that is aggregating at the resource level, and also controlling security to individual resources at an aggregated level. That is, a user would be authenticated and given links to those resources that they have authority to access.
Furthermore, there is also a pilot with three organisations that is aggregating at the resource level, and also controlling security to individual resources at an aggregated level. That is, a user would be authenticated and given links to those resources that they have authority to access.