In A Framework for Building Open DL's, the authors focused on standards and definitions for interoperability in DLs. Due to differing philosophies between computer scientists, library scientists, and networked information systems regarding digital libraries, there need to be certain standards that each discipline can follow to acheive similar interests. Among the metadata standards that are broad enough in nature to be applied to these categories are Dublin Core and DAI-PMH.
The article An Architecture for Information in DL's primarily focuses on the structure of information and types of digital objects, including data, metadata, and the unique identifier, or handle. The components of a digital library consist of the user interface, the search system, handle system, and repository. The structure of information in DL's has to do with the relationships between the materials. I took this to mean the relationship of words, metadata, and handles to each other to make an item searchable in the query. The article also examined the different formats, versions, and rights and permissions that information objects within a digital library consist of. As a side note, the handle examples in the text remind me of IP addressing.
Interoperability for Digital Objects and Repositories uses the case study of the Cornell/CNRI collaboration to examine the effectiveness of interoperability standards. In order for each system to work together, the handle system must be built to accommodate interoperability. The study wanted to focus more on standard definitions of interoperability to test their results.
Muddiest Point:
For the term/group project we are to have an example of other data formats, such as photo. Are we to create at least one out of the three collections in just that digital format? Or integrate at least one photo in each of the three collections?
No comments:
Post a Comment