1 / 19

Federating Terminology: Can We Avoid Reinventing the Wheel?

Federating Terminology: Can We Avoid Reinventing the Wheel?. Gail Hodge U.S. National Biological Information Infrastructure/ Information International Associates, Inc. CIDOC 2000 Ottawa, Canada August 25, 2000. The Problem.

theodore
Download Presentation

Federating Terminology: Can We Avoid Reinventing the Wheel?

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. Federating Terminology: Can We Avoid Reinventing the Wheel? Gail Hodge U.S. National Biological Information Infrastructure/ Information International Associates, Inc. CIDOC 2000 Ottawa, Canada August 25, 2000

  2. The Problem • Web and digital library projects have caused a boom in the need for controlled subject terminology schemes • Many of these subjects are already covered in existing thesauri, subject heading lists, etc., but often there is not a perfect match • Need to keep the cost of development and maintenance under control • Audiences who are already accustomed to certain controlled schemes in their fields • Partnerships are also valuable

  3. Can We Avoid Reinventing the Wheel?

  4. A Possible Solution: Federated Terminologies • A terminology system “built” from a series of distributed terminologies that are linked from a core • May link to the whole remote terminology, to top terms and hierarchies, or to lower level nodes • Display the distributed vocabulary through the same terminology browser so that it appears to be integrated • Ultimately, we would like to also take advantage of these sources as generalized “Terminology Services” on the Internet

  5. What is Needed to Federate Terminologies? • Protocol for communicating between terminologies -- requesting terms, receiving terms and interpreting structure • Metadata that describes terminologies in a way that generalized services can be provided

  6. Protocol • Querying a terminology via the Internet and retrieving terms (a structure) from it • Allow browsers and clients to access sources of which it has no previous knowledge • Components • Identification of the term as a digital object (a URL or more persistent scheme) • Identification of the Scheme • Structure for conveying the query • Structure for returning the terminology structure

  7. Exact Match Queryhttp://localhost/thesauri/Theme?biosphereResponse<DESCRIPTOR ID=“Biosphere” LABEL=“Biosphere” SN=“Organisns and ecosystems”><CAT LABEL=“Earth” <BT LABEL=“Earth” <NT LABEL=“Organisms”

  8. Major Protocol Issues • Many terminologies are not electronic; if electronic they may be in PDF; need restructuring to provide persistent identification • Slow speed of the Internet • Drivers have proven difficult to install by the target sites • Moving from RDF to XML

  9. Metadata Content Standard • Data elements needed to describe a Web-based terminology source for use by any browser/client • Available for review at www.alexandria.ucsb.edu/nkos • Key metadata elements could be contained in metatags or in a registry • Environmental Thesaurus Registry being developed by the NBII as a prototype

  10. Major Metadata Issues • Difficult to create the metadata unless you are the terminology “owner” • Self-registration is going to be necessary • Need for a taxonomy that generalizes the description of terminology resources

  11. Draft Taxonomy of Terminologies • No consistent approach to classifying terminology sources, particularly with a view to how they behave in a networked environment • Draft taxonomy developed (www.alexandria.ucsb.edu/) • Next step is to add to the definitions how each should behave in the networked environment • Comments are welcome

  12. Draft Taxonomy • Term Lists • Authority Files • Glossaries • Gazetteers • Dictionaries • Classification and Categorization • Subject Headings • Classification Schemes, Taxonomies and Categorization Schemes • Relationship Groups • Thesauri • Semantic Networks • Ontologies

  13. Networked Knowledge Organization Sources Working Group • Bring together knowledge organization source developers • Work across the various types of terminologies -- ontologies, thesauri,classification schemes, etc. • Discuss and support best practices related to using these sources in networked environments • Provide a “breeding ground” for collaboration

  14. NKOS, contd. • Ad hoc group of terminology developers - 70 members from 10 countries - Humanities, sciences and social sciences - Annual workshops at ACM Digital Library meetings; Dinner meetings at the American Society for Information Science and Technology Meetings; Web site (UC Santa Barbara), listserv (Coalition for Networked Information); listserv archive (OCLC)

  15. Contact Information • NKOS Web Site - www.alexandria.ucsb.edu/~lhill/nkos • Linda Hill - lhill@alexandria.ucsb.edu • Gail Hodge - gailhodge@aol.com • Joseph Busch - jbusch@metacode.com • National Biological Information Infrastructure www.nbii.gov • Anne Frondorf (Project Mgr.) - anne_frondorf@usgs.gov • Gail Hodge (Vocabulary Mgr.) - gailhodge@aol.com

More Related