[XML4Lib] mods: the new marc?

[Kyle Fenton]

I'm eager to take advantage of the ORE resource map as well.   A large  
part of my work these days is in building out a digital repository  
infrastructure.  In practice I plan to use "natively"  whatever  
descriptive schema is appropriate to an object, and to break objects  
out as atomistically as makes sense (e.g. each page object of a  
scanned book is an image object of its own).   Expressing the  
relationships among objects in a "work" becomes much more important,  
and the ORE resource map is tailor made for this kind of expression.

I by no means think MODS is a panacea.   But I think it is a step (or  
two, or three) up from Dublin Core when you need to conduct a search  
across a wide diversity of objects (books, images, video, data sets,  
finding aids, etc.).

--Kyle

On Dec 17, 2007, at 10:16 AM, Deridder, Jody L wrote:

> Hi Eric --
>  Have you looked at the new ORE docs?
>
>  I know that the move is toward FRBRization of metadata, and revamping
> LCSH (also used in MODS, often) for faceted subject headings -- and  
> that
> we need to consider usability across arenas (learning objects vs.
> libraries, for example).
>
> As you know, MODS was developed from MARC but still has many of the
> same drawbacks.  I'm wondering if the best solution at present isn't
> some combination scheme in RDF format.
>
> --jody
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: xml4lib-bounces at webjunction.org
> [mailto:xml4lib-bounces at webjunction.org] On Behalf Of Eric Lease  
> Morgan
> Sent: Sunday, December 16, 2007 4:34 PM
> To: xml4lib
> Subject: [XML4Lib] mods: the new marc?
>
>
> Is MODS the new MARC?
>
> As you may or may not know, I advocate "catalogs" include content
> beyond the things a library owns or licenses. Moreover, I advocate
> libraries take a more active role in collecting and providing
> services against information resources no matter where they reside on
> a network. Don't get me wrong, I don't advocating "cataloging" the
> entire Internet, but I do advocate actively collecting materials
> apropos to the needs of a particular library's patrons.
>
> In an effort to demonstrate such an idea I would like to collect and
> provide services against a number of different types of data/
> information freely available on the 'Net. Some of these things
> include but are not to the following listed in no priority order:
> electronic books/texts (Project Gutenberg, University of Michigan
> MBooks, Open Content Alliance, etc.), electronic journals from DOAJ,
> electronic journal articles from DOAJ Articles, pre-prints and post-
> prints from various OAI repositories, mailing list messages, selected
> blog postings, theses & dissertations from NDLTD, etc.
>
> Each of the things above can be systematically harvested through the
> use of OAI, simple Web crawling, or the retrieval of data sets. Once
> harvested the data could be stored in a database and/or indexed
> providing the means for discovery and services. The storage of this
> content in a database begs questions regarding tables, records, and
> fields. What might they be? Similarly, unless the index is going to
> be 100% free text, the harvest content/metadata will need to mapped
> to fields. Again, what fields?
>
> I'm not so naive to believe there is such a thing a the perfect
> database structure for this "catalog", nor do I believe free text
> indexing is the answer either. So, what sort of data structure should
> I use? Not MARC. MODS? Some incarnation of RDF?
>
> If I go this route I see the following plan:
>
>   0. Articulate a collection policy.
>   1. Acquire/harvest content in its raw form.
>   2. Convert the raw content into MODS, RDF, or
>      something else.
>   3. Save/archive the raw data because things get lost
>      in translation.
>   4. Save the MODS or RDF to a (XML) database.
>   5. Parse the MODS or RDF and save it to a
>      (relational) database.
>   6. Run scripts against the database to create things
>      like browsable lists, create new relationships
>      between items, or simply enhanced.
>   7. Index the MODS or RDF, or write a report against
>      the database intended for indexing.
>   8. Provide access to the index (via SRU, OpenSearch,
>      or Z39.50).
>   9. Provide services against the search results such
>      as Get It, Review It, Buy It, Bookmark It, Compare It
>      To Other things, etc.
>  10. Got to Step #1.
>
> Assuming there is no single database structure for such a idea, what
> flavor of XML would you use as your canonical data format? MODS? RDF?
> Something else?
>
> -- 
> Eric Lease Morgan
> University Libraries of Notre Dame
>
> _______________________________________________
> XML4Lib mailing list
> XML4Lib at webjunction.org
> http://lists.webjunction.org/mailman/listinfo/xml4lib
> _______________________________________________
> XML4Lib mailing list
> XML4Lib at webjunction.org
> http://lists.webjunction.org/mailman/listinfo/xml4lib
>
>