metadata possibilities: from the ieee lom through dublin core to …the “cloud”? dr. norm...
TRANSCRIPT
Dr. Norm [email protected]
Athabasca, AB 11/12/09
Metadata Possibilities: from the Metadata Possibilities: from the IEEE LOM through Dublin Core to IEEE LOM through Dublin Core to
…the “Cloud”?…the “Cloud”?
Photo: EssjayNZ
Overview
• What is a standard & how can it be evaluated?• Standards to consider for metadata for online
learning resources:– Learning Object Metadata (IEEE LOM)– Dublin Core– ISO/IEC JTC1 SC36 “Metadata for Learning
Resources”
• A case for a “new” approach
What is a standard?• "documented agreements containing technical
specifications or other precise criteria to be used consistently as rules, guidelines, or definitions of characteristics, to ensure that materials, products, processes and services are fit for their purpose"
• Fit for Purpose: discoverable, reusable, interoperable, adaptable, accessible
• De facto / de jure standards: complex relationship• E.g. Dublin Core, folksonomies, etc.
Standards are “Living” Documents: They have a 5-7 Year Lifecycle
Three Standards for Educational & Generic Resource Metadata
IEEE Learning Object Metadata• Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers; Standard
released in 2002; renewed in 2009; CanCore as documentation
ISO Dublin Core (OCLC –Online Computer Library Centre)• American (ANSI/NISO) Standard in 2001 (Z39.85-2001)• ISO Standard 15836:2009• IETF RFC 5013 of August 2007
ISO/IEC JTC 1 Learning Resource Metadata (will be standardizing IMS Content Packaging and SCORM)
• 2009/09 (framework); 2010/03 (Dublin Core elements)
IEEE Learning Object Metadata
• 1484.12.3: Standard For Learning Technology-Extensible Markup Language (XML) Schema Definition Language Binding For Learning Object Metadata (2005)
• “On 13 May 2009, the IEEE-SA Standards Board approved the reaffirmation of LOM. That means that LOM has entered its second 5 year period of being an active standard.”
LOM Basics: 76 Elements
• General (10)• Lifecycle (9)• Meta-metadata (10)• Educational (11)• Technical (12)• Rights (3)• Relation (7)• Annotation (4)• Classification (9)
2 types of elements:• Ones containing others• Ones containing data6 types of data: • CharacterString• LangString (value,
language indicator)• DateTime, Duration• Vocabulary• vCard
How elements & data work together<general> <identifier> <catalog>CAREO</catalog> <entry>632844</entry> </identifier> <identifier> <catalog>URI</catalog> <entry>http://www.pcc.edu/dl/idea.html</entry> </identifier> <title> <string language="eng">Idea: The Inter…</string> <string language="fra">Idea: la base…</string> </title>
Complex structures: classification, lifecycle, technical <contribute>
<role> <source>LOMv1.0</source> <value>editor</value> </role> <entity>BEGIN:VCARDVERSION:3.0N:Smith;John;W.;Dr.;FN:Dr. John W. SmithORG:Open Learning AgencyEND:VCARD </entity> <date> <dateTime>2003</dateTime> </date> </contribute>
How are these Elements used?International Survey from 2006
5 Sets of records varying in size from 75 to over 3000; 50 randomly selected from each (n=250):
• ARIADNE Project (EU) • the LTSN (UK)• Metalab (France)• CELTS (China)• CAREO (Canada)
Frequency of Element Use
0102030405060708090100
6.3:
Des
crip
tion
5.5:
Inte
nded
:End
:Use
r:R
o
9.2.
2.1:
Id
4.2:
Siz
e
5.1:
Inte
ract
ivity
:Typ
e
6.2:
Cop
yrig
ht:a
nd:O
ther
:
3.3:
Met
adat
a:S
chem
a
6:R
ight
s
1.5:
Key
wor
d
3.4:
Lang
uage
2.3.
3:D
ate
3.2:
Con
trib
ute
3.2.
1:R
ole
3.2.
2:E
ntity
3:M
eta-
met
adat
a
2.3.
2:E
ntity
4:T
echn
ical
4.3:
Loca
tion
2.3:
Con
trib
ute
9:C
lass
ifica
tion
9.2.
2.2:
Ent
ry
1.4:
Des
crip
tion
1.1:
Iden
tifie
r
1.1.
1:C
atal
og
1.1.
2:E
ntry
9.2:
Tax
on:P
ath
9.2.
1:S
ourc
e
9.2.
2.:T
axon
5.2:
Lear
ning
:Res
ourc
e:T
2.3.
1:R
ole
5:E
duca
tiona
l
2:Li
fe:C
ycle
1.3:
Lang
uage
4.1:
For
mat
1.2:
Titl
e
9.1:
Pur
pose
Frequency of Element Use
The most frequently used elements (not container elements;
%-tage): • Title, Description, Keyword• Format (e.g. .html, .jpg, .doc)• Language (human)• Author• Learning Resource Type (simulation, exercise, etc.)• Subject Classification (Purpose=Discipline)
0
50
100
150
200
250
FN
OR
G
EM
AIL
BD
AY
TE
L
TE
L.x
EM
AIL
.Typ
e
MA
ILE
R
TIT
LE
RO
LE
LOG
O
KE
Y
KE
Y.T
ype.
x
X-x
How are used elements populated?
• Contributor Types • Info about contributors
0
20406080
100120140160180
Aut
hor
Pub
lishe
r
Val
idat
or
unkn
own
initi
ator
term
inat
or
valid
ator
edito
r
grap
hica
lde
sign
erte
chni
cal
impl
emen
ter
cont
ent
prov
ider
tech
nica
lva
lidat
ored
ucat
iona
lva
lidat
or
scrip
t w
riter
inst
ruct
iona
lde
sign
ersu
bjec
tm
atte
r
Conclusions: Elements and Values Selected Frequently
• The LOM is used to describe intellectual content of resources:– General: Identifier, Title, Description, Keyword– LifeCycle.Contribute (role = Author and publisher)– Classification (Purpose=Discipline)
• The LOM is used to describe file and media characteristics:– Technical.Format, Technical.Size, Location– Educational.Learning Resource Type (text,
hypertext, notes, etc.)
Conclusions: Elements and Values Seldom Selected
• LOM use does NOT emphasize description of an educational context or level:– Educational.Semantic Density 0%– Educational.Context <20%– EndUserRole 40%
• LOM is NOT used to describe resources in terms of software objects:– Structure, Version (i.e. Alpha, Beta), Status <18% – Aggregation level <27%– Contribute.Role="terminator" “technical
implementer/validator“ 0%
“De facto status” of IEEE LOM
“De facto status:” LOM vs DC
Criticisms“The “industrialist” Learning Objects approach has run
out of steam” (OLCOS Roadmap, 2007)Keep it simple (stupid!) E.g., see Wilson 2005:• notepad test - can you create a valid data instance in Notepad
in less than 4k? • reading test: can you read and understand the basics of the
specification in less than one hourr?
• scripting test - can you script a simple client or service provider in one day?
Embed in html; realize value with small investment; compatible with “Web 2.0” technologies & practices (interactive information sharing; collaboration; distributed)
Dublin Core
• ISO Standard 15836-2003 of February 2003– 2nd edition available as of 2009-02-18
• ANSI/NISO Standard Z39.85-2007 of May 2007
• IETF RFC 5013 of August 2007• OCLC• As a de facto standard?
15 Elements in the DCES
• Contributor• Coverage• Creator• Date • Description• Format• Identifier• Language
• Publisher• Relation• Rights• Source• Subject• Title• Type
Expressing Dublin Core Description Sets using XML (for title)
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?> <dcds:descriptionSet
xmlns:dcds="http://purl.org/dc/xmlns/2008/09/01/dc-ds-xml/">
<!-- Description Element --> <dcds:description> <dcds:statement dcds:propertyURI=“...dc/terms/title"> <dcds:literalValueString>DCMI Home Page </dcds:literalValueString> </dcds:statement> </dcds:description> </dcds:descriptionSet>
RDF: "The resource (example.org) has the subject 'Ornitology' from the vocab: …/taxonomy/MyVocab"
<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"xmlns:ex="http://example.org/taxonomy/"xmlns:dcam="http://purl.org/dc/dcam/">
<rdf:Description rdf:about="http://example.org/123"> <dcterms:subject> <rdf:Description> <dcam:memberOf
rdf:resource="http://example.org/taxonomy/MyVocab"/> <rdf:value>Ornitology</rdf:value> </rdf:Description></dcterms:subject></rdf:Description></rdf:RDF>
What does RDF in particular enable?• "a recommended best practice for exposing,
sharing, and connecting pieces of data, information, and knowledge on the Semantic Web using URIs [Web addresses] and RDF."
• “The properties and classes of DCMI Metadata Terms have been defined for compatibility with Linked Data principles”
• “Over the past two years, vast amounts of commercial and public-sector data have been added to a growing to a linked data cloud.”
Where do metadata live?
In centralized or distributed Learning Object Repositories
Free in the Web
Who contributes metadatafor a learning resource?
E.g. Searching in Wikipedia vs. DBpedia
Wikipedia Article: Max Schreck
http://wiki.dbpedia.org/OnlineAccess#h28-3
DC: Levels of Interoperability
• Level 1: Shared Term Definitions -based on shared natural-language definitions
• Level 2: Formal Semantic Interop: based on the shared formal model via RDF & linked data
• Level 3: Description Set Syntactic Interop: share abstract syntax for validatable metadata records
• Level 4: Description Set Profile Interop: shared vocabularies & view of world
Metadata for Learning Resources
• ISO/IEC 19788-1 ITLET – Metadata for Learning Resources –Part 1: Framework 2010-09
• ISO/IEC 19788-2 ITLET – Metadata for Learning Resources – Part 2: Core Elements 2011-03
• “The DC-Education Community is working with the ISO Metadata for Learning Resources group to ensure compatibility of the DC-Education Application Profile Module and the ISO MLR-5: Educational Elements standard. We will be attending ISO MLR webconferences on 16 November 2009 and 18 December 2009, in preparation for the group's big meeting in Osaka in 2010.”
MLR – Characteristics
• Multilingual capability: for element contents, for documentation and support
• Accessibility: one part of the standard will be devoted to accessibility; accessibility experts have been providing input throughout
• Compatibility: with the IEEE LOM (as an application profile), with Dublin Core (very directly), with Dublin Core RDF
• Support: implementation guideline(s) planned
MLR Part 1
MLR Part 2: Dublin Core Elements
• “This Part is provides full Dublin Core interoperability for this Standard. This is achieved through the description of each Dublin Core element using the MLR data element specification template provided in the MLR Part 1 Framework. In addition, Dublin Core definitions were reviewed in order to level out interpretation [and] ambiguity[,] and best practice guidance is provided in notes.”
How RDF works
Oval = Resource (URI)
Rectangle = Literal (String)
References
• ISO SC36 Livelink: http://isotc.iso.org/livelink/livelink?func=ll&objId=806742
• Dublin Core http://dublincore.org/• My blog: http://learningspaces.org/n/node/34