mopark, mets, and more: managing the virtual future in the loch lomond and trossachs national park -...
Post on 16-Jan-2016
217 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
MoPark, METS, and More:
Managing the Virtual Future in the Loch Lomond and Trossachs National Park - and learning along the way.
Presentation to LIDA 2005
Dennis Nicholson, Director
Centre for Digital Library Research,
University of Strathclyde, Glasgow,
Scotland
Key focus: Interpretive Journeys, multimedia presentations on story of Park’s landscape, history, culture, flora, fauna
Aims widerNot just PDAs: audio-only tours, ‘talking boards’, leaflets, repository of all digital / non-digital resources
Aims wider:
Overview [1]
Metadata Options Appraisal Loch Lomond and the Trossachs
National Park Interreg III Mobility and National
Parks Project MoPark http://www.mopark.net
Overview [2]
About MoPark and the MOA MOA to MOA Phase1 (and why) A look at an Interpretive Journey Why METS, Rest of the framework DAMS Version #1 Next Steps Experiment and Learn
The best laid plans…
Plan: 8.5 days MOA to feed into: DAMS design, creation; Create
metadata; Manage repository Reality: Longer, phased MOA:
Lifetime of MoPark; METS-based framework feeding DAMS design and framing detailed MOA
But overall plan vindicated
Current State of Play
Metadata Options Appraisal: Early work (Phase I) established
the need for a phased approach Phase I complete:
Framework based on METS agreed Outline requirements for DAMS as regards
metadata handling established
Phase II (specifying the detailed requirement) in early stages
Examples of real IJs now exist
Metadata Options Appraisal Requirement:
To examine – and make recommendations on - the needs of the Loch Lomond and Trossachs National Park as regards the metadata, metadata standards, and metadata management required for the competent handling of digital materials both now and in the future.
To cover three levels of need: MoPark project (Level 1); Extension to other topics and Park areas (Level 2); Wider Park beyond MoPark (Level 3)
What we found:
Sufficient detail available to enable the general needs of the project and Park in respect of digital object metadata and DAMS functionality to be specified.
Specifying the need in detail more difficult at this stage – the need for a phased approach
Why a phased approach?
A need for: A detailed examination of actual
interpretive journeys; components More staff experience of the
associated issues and problems An in-depth survey other digital
objects, their usage, life-cycles.
Phased Approach…
Phase 1: Would set out a framework within
which the full requirement could develop
Propose a flexible development path to facilitate the determination of the full requirement
Phase II Would implement the development
path
Framework
Three elements: Adopt METS Metadata Encoding
and Transmission Standard Adopt national and international
standards relevant to the field. Cooperate with other key players
on inter-repository interoperability
Early Stages of Phase II
Have, are following the framework and the flexible development plan
Have initial METS-based DAMS Have initial decisions on some
attributes and have populated the DAMS with them
Have real IJs, components, and structures; the rest is detail but…
Why METS?; Feel for an Interpretive Journey
Inchcailloch – an island on Loch Lomond
Cover page of 1st Interpretive Journey; controls
Map of Inchcailloch, click-able option throughout, possible to zoom then navigate, key, challenges, METS
G
F E
D
C
B
4
2
x
7
6
5
x
x
x
INCHCAILLOCH
CLAIRINSHThe Kitchen
BALMAHA PIER
Figure 1: Schematic diagram illustrating Inchcailloch journey
Numbers refer to interpretive points on plan
A
H
Journeys; Stops; Joint stops; different start + end points, Solar boat
Stop features: Highland boundary fault; animated GIF; audio
Once upon a time; dropdowns of animals and sounds, guess the animal from the sound etc
History and industry
Plus: Videos, animations, games, 3D maps and more
Etc.
Why METS?
METS: Designed for complex digital objects Provides for all of the metadata types
likely to be required within MoPark and (in time) the Park generally
Sufficiently flexible to allow it to meet the detailed requirements drawn out in Phase II of the appraisal.
Provides a good guide to the areas we need to address
METS Overview; Details; all the metadata types needed
Why METS?
METS provides for: Descriptive metadata (MARC, Dublin Core
etc) at both individual object and composite (i.e. Interpretive Journey) level,
Administrative metadata (technical metadata, rights metadata, analogue source information, digital object files provenance),
Files metadata (for files containing content which comprise the electronic versions of the digital object)
Why METS?
METS provides for: Structural Map metadata to outline the
hierarchical structure of a digital library object such as an Interpretive Journey
Structural Links metadata to allow recording of links between hierarchical levels
Behaviour metadata to allow metadata on ‘executable behaviours’ to be encoded
Why METS?
A Safe Path… METS framework provides for all of the
complex issues faced by MoPark; the Park It is supported or recognised as important
by groups like L of C, JISC, Digital Library Federation, British Library, SLIC
A DAMS built round METS (and MoPark) ought to be flexible enough to meet future Park needs in areas such as FoI, Maps, IPR handling, Educational packages, promotional materials control, outreach
Screen to enter metadata categories, sub-categories, attributes etc
Screen to enter asset types – images, videos, IJ, IJ stops; also composite or not, metadata categories & associated file types
Component objects, buttons for approval process – legality, metadata quality, and so on
Composite objects: stops, full journeys
Screen to enter IJ metadata; most METS top levels
Screen to enter descriptive IJ metadata
Screen to enter IPR and structural map IJ metadata (still embryonic)
What’s next?
Refining the metadata requirement for IJs and other materials – still a major task; finalising descriptions
Writing a procedures and training manual; metadata content standards
Improving DAMS functionality and ergonomics
Identifying huge amount of work that needs to be done in future
MoPark: Experiment & Learn
MoPark didn’t go to plan at MOA level
However, the high-level plan was to use the project to experiment and learn – which is what they have done in the metadata area
A good example of how projects can be valuable preliminaries to major organisational commitments
Further Information
METS website is at http://www.loc.gov/standards/mets/.
Contact: d.m.nicholson@strath.ac.uk CDLR: http://cdlr.strath.ac.uk/
Questions?
top related