Metadata for interoperable cultural content: a personal viewpoint

1. Metadata for interoperable cultural content:a personal viewpoint Dr. Paul Miller Interoperability Focus UKOLN P.Miller@ukoln.ac.uk http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/ UKOLN is funded by Resource: the Council for Museums, Archives and Libraries, the Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC) of the Further and Higher Education Funding Councils, as well as by project funding from JISC and the EU. UKOLN also receives support from the Universities of Bath and Hull where staff are based. Possible Developments in Resource Discovery & National Directories. Paris, 6 July 2001

2. Some facts • More people visit museums than go to theme parks and pop concerts • Visiting libraries is more popular than going to the cinema • There are over 4,000 public library branches in the UK • The vast majority will be connected to the ‘Peoples Network’ by 2002 • 62% already are. Possible Developments in Resource Discovery & National Directories. Paris, 6 July 2001

3. Some more facts • Vast quantities of cultural content are being digitised and placed online • €83,000,000 in funding allocated under nof–digi programme on Monday • More than €12,000,000 awarded to SCRAN by Millennium Commission • 1,000,000 records now online. Possible Developments in Resource Discovery & National Directories. Paris, 6 July 2001

4. Some Programmes • New Opportunities Fund Digitisation Programme (nof–digi) • €83,000,000 of National Lottery money for digitisation of content to support learning • Culture Online • DCMS initiative to put a broad swathe of culture online • Business model currently with the Treasury. Possible Developments in Resource Discovery & National Directories. Paris, 6 July 2001

5. Some more Programmes • JISC DNER • ‘Distributed National Electronic Resource’, joining up a wide range of content for tertiary education sector, and making it more relevant to learning and teaching. Possible Developments in Resource Discovery & National Directories. Paris, 6 July 2001

6. Some assumptions • Having access to digital surrogates of cultural heritage material is ‘useful’ and desirable • The public sector has a role to play in this, beyond simply granting digitisation rights to Microsoft • Availability of regional/national/international corpora of material is more useful to the user than hundreds or thousands of individual sites • Metadata is key to making the vision reality. Possible Developments in Resource Discovery & National Directories. Paris, 6 July 2001

7. Some more assumptions • Distribution is better than centralisation • Portals are good • Thick portals are better • A single portal is bad • Shared middleware services play a key role • The problem is bigger than the UKor Europe. Possible Developments in Resource Discovery & National Directories. Paris, 6 July 2001

8. In search of solutions… • A common approach • Mandated as a condition of grant? • nof–digi technical standards and guidelines • DNER Learning & Teaching Programme technical guidelines • Canadian Digital Cultural Content Initiative technical guidelines • e–GIF • An open approach • Avoidance of proprietary solutions • Based on emerging or established standards • XML based. Mappable to Dublin Core…. See www.govtalk.gov.uk/ See www.peoplesnetwork.gov.uk/nof/technicalstandards.html Possible Developments in Resource Discovery & National Directories. Paris, 6 July 2001

9. In search of solutions… • A consensus–based approach • Need community adoption and understanding • Data creators and providers need a sense of ownership • An evolutionary approach • Channels • New standards • New user requirements • Remember preservation. Possible Developments in Resource Discovery & National Directories. Paris, 6 July 2001

10. An architecture • Integrated information environment is complex • An overarching architecture helps to place individual features in context • searching • harvesting • alerting • Shared middleware • Common identifiers, etc. See www.jisc.ac.uk/dner/architecture/ Possible Developments in Resource Discovery & National Directories. Paris, 6 July 2001

11. Part of a model • Placing detailed descriptions of all cultural artefacts online infeasible? • Expensive • A big job! • Leads to information overload • Collection Level Description a way forward • Pointers into collections • Easier to harmonise across domains • Achievable. See www.ukoln.ac.uk/cd-focus/ Possible Developments in Resource Discovery & National Directories. Paris, 6 July 2001

12. The Big Issue(s) • Terminological control • Shared subject terms • Certification/ Authenticity • How do I know it’s an authoritative description of the Mona Lisa ? • Infrastructure • How to enable cross–search? • Meeting the requirements of new users • Largely let down by our current offerings. Possible Developments in Resource Discovery & National Directories. Paris, 6 July 2001