1 / 17

EQUALITY OF RETRIEVAL: Levelling the Metadata Playing Field in Big Indexes

EQUALITY OF RETRIEVAL: Levelling the Metadata Playing Field in Big Indexes. Aaron Wood Metadata Librarian Assistant Head, Technical Services Libraries and Cultural Resources University of Calgary aawood@ucalgary.ca. American Library Association 2010 Midwinter Meeting:

peigi
Download Presentation

EQUALITY OF RETRIEVAL: Levelling the Metadata Playing Field in Big Indexes

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. EQUALITY OF RETRIEVAL: Levelling the Metadata Playing Field in Big Indexes Aaron Wood Metadata Librarian Assistant Head, Technical Services Libraries and Cultural Resources University of Calgary aawood@ucalgary.ca American Library Association 2010 Midwinter Meeting: Association for Library Collections and Technical Services Catalog Form and Function Interest Group: Recent Trends in Catalog Architecture January 16, 2010

  2. University of Calgary’s metadata record counts in Summon: • Over 2,270,000 MARC records • Just under 16,000 simple Dublin Core records from its institutional repository (DSpace) • Over 79,000 simple Dublin Core records from its local digitized collections (CONTENTdm and an in-house developed system) • 3,931 records describing cultural objects from its museum collection • 268 RAD-compliant xml records representing archival holdings

  3. The Metadata Playing Field Full text vendor xml records Local collection metadata records: MARC, DC, EAD, etc.

  4. Leveling It Through considering what the user-oriented goals of unified discovery services are: • Facets  met through leveraging available metadata? • Increased access points with more detailed information on individual search results  met through merging metadata records for the same resource, i.e., normalization?

  5. The Importance of Facets? • ‘...facets help end users refine searches, navigate, browse and manage large results sets’ (Calhoun, Online Catalogs, v) • ‘More Intuitive Searching: less complicated initial searches, less pre-limiting, more post-limits via faceting...’ (Harper, 11) • ‘Improved search of catalog and local resources: keyword, facets, visualization’ (Burke, 28)

  6. MARC Mapping:

  7. Enhanced MARC Mapping:

  8. Eg., Content Type Facet

  9. Increased Access Points and Clarity MORE: • hypertext links to resources and supplementary information, • subject information, • tables of contents, • abstracts and summaries, • and any other details available

  10. Current Examples Primo OCLC (Harper, 20) (Calhoun , RDA and OCLC,10)

  11. Aaron Wood Metadata Librarian Assistant Head, Technical ServicesLibraries and Cultural ResourcesUniversity of Calgaryaawood@ucalgary.ca

  12. Works Cited Burke, Jane. “Discovery versus Disintermediation.” XXIX Annual Charleston Conference: Issues in Book and Serial Acquisitions: Necessity Is the Mother of Invention. 6 Nov. 2009. Online 30 Nov. 2009. <http://www.katina.info/ conference/2009presentations/Fri815_Burke.ppt> Calhoun, Karen, et al. “Online Catalogs: What Users and Librarians Want: An OCLC Report.” OCLC Online Computer Library Center. 3 Mar. 2009. Online. 15 Dec. 2009. <http://www.oclc.org/reports/onlinecatalogs/fullreport.pdf>. Calhoun, Karen, et al. “RDA and OCLC.” OCLC Online Computer Library Center. 30 Oct. 2009. Online. 15 Dec. 2009. < http://www5.oclc.org/downloads/webinars/RDA_09Oct30_slides.ppt>. De Groat, Great. “Future Directions in Metadata Remediation for Metadata Aggregators.” Digital Library Federation. Feb. 2009. Online. 5 Jul. 2009. <http://www.diglib.org/aquifer/ dlf110.pdf >. Harper, Corey. “Metadata Normalization: A Case Study in Primo and Linked Open Data in Libraries.” Metadata Working Group Forum, Cornell. 16 May 2008. Online 12 Dec. 2009. < http://ecommons.library.cornell.edu/bitstream/ 1813/10920/1/harper_cornell20080516.ppt> “MARC Mapping to MODS: Version 3.3.” Library of Congress. May 2008. Online. 27 Jun. 2008. <http://loc.gov/standards/mods/mods-mapping.html>

  13. Further Reading Bollier, David. “The Promise and Peril of Big Data.” Aspen Institute. 2010. Online. 3 Jan. 2010. <http://www.aspeninstitute.org/sites/default/files/content/docs/pubs/ InfoTech09.pdf> Boock, Michael, FaryChadwell, and Terry Reese. “WorldCat Local Task Force: Report to LAMP.” Oregon State University Libraries. 2 Apr. 2009. Online. 12 Dec. 2009. <http://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/jspui/bitstream/1957/11167/1/Worldcat% 20local%20task%20force%20report_cost%20redacted.pdf>. Coyle, Karen. “The Library Catalog: Some Possible Futures.” Journal of Academic Librarianship, 33.3 (May 2007): 414-416. ScienceDirect. University of Calgary Libraries, Calgary, AB. 4 Nov. 2009. <http://sciencedirect.com>. Debenham, John, and Carles Sierra. “Merging Intelligent Agency and the Semantic Web.” Knowledge-Based Systems, 21.3 (Apr. 2008): 184-191. ScienceDirect. University of Calgary Libraries, Calgary, AB. 12 Dec. 2009. <http:sciencedirect.com>.

  14. “The Fourth Paradigm: Data-Intensive Scientific Discovery.” Microsoft Research. 2009. Online. 3 Jan. 2010. < http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/UM/redmond/about/ collaboration/fourthparadigm/4th_PARADIGM_BOOK_complete_HR.pdf>. Gavrilis, Dimitris, Constantia Kakali, and Christos Papatheodorou. “Enhancing Library Services with Web 2.0 Functionalities.” Research and Advanced Technology for Digital Libraries. SpringerLink, 2008. University of Calgary Libraries, Calgary, AB. 23 Jul. 2009. <http://springerlink.com>. Lauridsen, Helle, and Graham Stone. “The 21st-Century Library: A Whole New Ball Game?” Serials, 22.2 (Jul. 2009): 141-145. MetaPress. University of Calgary Libraries, Calgary, AB. 3 Jan. 2010. <http:metapress.com>. Mayfield, Ian, and Linda Humphreys. “Next-Generaton Library Catalogues: Reviews of ELIN, WorldCat Local and Aquabrowser.” Serials, 21.3 (Nov. 2008): 224-230. MetaPress. University of Calgary Libraries, Calgary, AB. 13 Dec. 2009. <http:metapress.com>.

  15. Patel, Chintan O, and James J. Cimino. “Using Semantic and Structural Properties of the Unified Medical Language System to Discover Potential Terminological Relationships.” Journal of American Medical Informatics Association, 16.3 (May/Jun. 2009): 346-353. BMJ Journals. University of Calgary Libraries, Calgary, AB. 13 Dec. 2009. <http://jamia.bmj.com>. Schaffner, Jennifer. “The Metadata Is the Interface: Better Description for Better Discovery of Archives and Special Collections.” OCLC Online Computer Library Center. 2009. Online. 5 Jul. 2009. <http://oclc.org/research/publications/ library/2009/2009-06.pdf>. Simpson, Betsy. “Collections Define Cataloging’s Future.” Journal of Academic Librarianship, 33.4 (Jul. 2007): 507-511. ScienceDirect. University of Calgary Libraries, Calgary, AB. 4 Nov. 2009. <http://sciencedirect.com>. Stevenson, Karen. “Next-Generaton Library Catalogues: Reviews of Encore, Primo, Summon and Summa.” Serials, 22.1 (Mar. 2009): 68-82. MetaPress. University of Calgary Libraries, Calgary, AB. 13 Dec. 2009. <http:metapress.com>.

More Related