No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Metadata Interoperability for Institutional Repositories: A Case Study in Malang City Academic Libraries
Abstract
The aim of this study is to understand, describe, and analyze metadata interoperability in Universitas Brawijaya Library that used Brawijaya Knowledge Garden (BKG) and Eprints software, University of Muhammadiyah Malang Library that used Ganesha Digital Library (GDL) and Eprints software, and Malang State Library that used Muatan Lokal (Mulok) software. This study also discussed supporting and inhibiting factors for interoperability metadata. This study employed a case study-qualitative approach. The finding indicates that the metadata interoperability can be performed by using metadata crosswalks. Implementation metadata crosswalks by mapping BKG fields and GDL Fields to the Dublin Core Metadata Element Set (DCMES). The results in the mapping of appropriate metadata schemes without removing the existing metadata scheme element and demonstrating technical specifications for standard metadata. Open Archives Initiative Protocol for Metadata Harvesting (OAI-PMH) features can use for metadata interoperability in the union catalog that have been being developed by the National Library of Indonesia, called Indonesia OneSearch. The supporting factors in metadata interoperability are standard metadata and a standard protocol for interoperability; whereas, the inhibiting factor is the minimum human resources having metadata capability and the open access policy that has not applied to each academic libraries. All of those academic libraries need to make an effort to external interoperability to union catalogs to improve visibility digital content and applied open access policies.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
The purposes of this research are to know, describe, and analyze institutional repository softwares selection in Universitas Brawijaya (UB) Library, State University of Malang (UM) Library, and University of Muhammadiyah Malang (UMM) Library, also comparing software features of institutional repository.This research is using multi-site case study method with qualitative approach. Data was collected by observation, interviews, use of documents and audio-visual material. The results of this research indicate that the selection of software in academic library needs to pay attention to four aspects of software selection: (1) as needed; (2) have a licence; (3) technical support, training, relevant documentation and maintenance; (4) staff responsible for the selection and evaluation of digital collection software and related services to meet user or community needs. The selection of institutional repository software is not appropriate, resulting in the UB Library to migrate data from BKG to Eprints and UMM Library to migrate manually from GDL to Eprints. Academic library needs to pay attention to right aspects of software selection in building and developing institutional repositories and features.
In this article we investigate the problem of semantic interoperability between archival and bibliographic metadata used in digital libraries and repositories. We investigate the semantic relationships between two metadata standards, namely the Encoded Archival Description (EAD) and the Metadata Object Description Schema (MODS). We propose a crosswalk between EAD and MODS consisting of three basic components: (a) a semantic mapping from EAD elements/attributes to MODS elements/attributes, (b) techniques to map the hierarchical structure of the EAD document to MODS, and (c) techniques to retain in MODS the information related to the archival components that is inherited from the descriptions of components of higher hierarchy in the EAD document.
This is an electronic version of an article published in Lina Bountouri, Manolis Gergatsoulis. "Interoperability between archival and bibliographic metadata: an EAD to MODS crosswalk", Journal of Library Metadata, Vol. 9, No. 1, pages 98-133, 2009. Journal of Library Metadata is available online at: http://www.informaworld.com and the open URL for this article is http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~db=all~content=a914011347~frm=titlelink.
This is the second part of an analysis of the methods that have been used to achieve or improve interoperability among metadata schemas and their applications in order to facilitate the conversion and exchange of metadata and to enable cross-domain metadata harvesting and federated searches. From a methodological point of view, implementing interoperability may be considered at different levels of operation: schema level (discussed in Part I of the article), record level (discussed in Part II of the article), and repository level (also discussed in Part II). The results of efforts to improve interoperability may be observed from different perspectives as well, including element-based and value-based approaches.
The rapid growth of Internet resources and digital collections has been accompanied by a proliferation of metadata schemas, each of which has been designed based on the requirements of particular user communities, intended users, types of materials, subject domains, project needs, etc. Problems arise when building large digital libraries or repositories with metadata records that were prepared according to diverse schemas. This article (published in two parts) contains an analysis of the methods that have been used to achieve or improve interoperability among metadata schemas and applications, for the purposes of facilitating conversion and exchange of metadata and enabling cross-domain metadata harvesting and federated searches. From a methodological point of view, implementing interoperability may be considered at different levels of operation: schema level, record level, and repository level. Part I of the article intends to explain possible situations in which metadata schemas may be created or implemented, whether in individual projects or in integrated repositories. It also discusses approaches used at the schema level. Part II of the article will discuss metadata interoperability efforts at the record and repository levels.
Fenomena Gold dan Green Open Access mulai tumbuh dan berkembang di Indonesia. Telah banyak perguruan tinggi di Indonesia yang menyediakan institusional repositori (institutional repositories) yang berfungsi sebagai media yang memfasilitasi kegiatan desiminasi, akses, penggunaan kembali dan pelestarian dari sebuah karya yang dihasilkan oleh civitas akademika perguruan tinggi tersebut (Green Open Access). Selain institusional repository, perguruan tinggi juga menerbitkan jurnal secara elektronik dengan lisensi terbuka (Gold Open Access) sehingga mampu memacu proses desiminasi ilmu pengetahuaan dan mengakselerasi dampak (impact) agar artikel ilmiah yang diterbitkan tersebut dapat disitasi oleh publkasi artikel ilmiah yang lain. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah metode kualitatif. Penelitian ini menunjukan perkembangan open access dan kontribusinya bagi komunitas ilmiah di Indonesia, melalui pemaparan data baik secara kuantitatif maupun kualitatif mengenai jumlah dan pertumbuhan repositori institusi dan jurnal elektronik.
Cambridge Core - General - Metadata for Information Management and Retrieval - by David Haynes
Metadata serves several purposes. It supports resource discovery, locates the actual digital resource by inclusion of a digital identifier, organizes electronic resources bringing similar resources together and distinguishing dissimilar resources, provides administrative information for controlling the digital library, and provides technical, preservation and rights management information needed to support immediate and long-term permanent access. There are a variety of metadata schemes that serve different purposes for different object types, subjects and audiences. With disparate metadata schemes, ensuring that information collected in a specific scheme by one organization for a particular purpose can be exchanged, transferred or used by another organization for a different purpose becomes an issue. Metadata frameworks, crosswalks, and registries are ways to achieve interoperability. Controlled terminologies add more precise meaning to metadata. The integration of controlled terminologies and metadata schemes is key to the development of the Semantic Web.
From the Publisher:As the World Wide Web has emerged as a major research tool across all fields of study, the concept of metadata has become a crucial topic. Metadata, which can be broadly defined as "data about data", refers to the searchable definitions used to Locate information. This issue is particularly relevant to searches on the Web, where metatags may determine the ease with which a particular Web site is located by searchers. This book defines this little-understood concept, explains its importance and potential uses in the networked environment, and describes existing metadata standards in the field of cultural heritage information.
portal: Libraries and the Academy 3.2 (2003) 327-336
In the fall of 2002, something extraordinary occurred in the continuing networked information revolution, shifting the dynamic among individually driven innovation, institutional progress, and the evolution of disciplinary scholarly practices. The development of institutional repositories emerged as a new strategy that allows universities to apply serious, systematic leverage to accelerate changes taking place in scholarship and scholarly communication, both moving beyond their historic relatively passive role of supporting established publishers in modernizing scholarly publishing through the licensing of digital content, and also scaling up beyond ad-hoc alliances, partnerships, and support arrangements with a few select faculty pioneers exploring more transformative new uses of the digital medium.
Many technology trends and development efforts came together to make this strategy possible. Online storage costs have dropped significantly; repositories are now affordable. Standards like the open archives metadata harvesting protocol are now in place; some progress has also been made on the standards for the underlying metadata itself. The thinking about digital preservation over the past five years has advanced to the point where the needs are widely recognized and well defined, the technical approaches at least superficially mapped out, and the need for action is now clear. The development of free, publicly accessible journal article collections in disciplines such as high-energy physics has demonstrated ways in which the network can change scholarly communication by altering dissemination and access patterns; separately, the development of a series of extraordinary digital works had at least suggested the potential of creative authorship specifically for the digital medium to transform the presentation and transmission of scholarship.
The leadership of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in the development and deployment of the DSpace institutional repository system <http://www.dspace.org/>, created in collaboration with the Hewlett Packard Corporation, has been a model pointing the way forward for many other universities. In 2003, with funding from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and other sources, MIT's DSpace is scheduled to be replicated at a number of additional institutions around the world; the software has also been released publicly under an open source arrangement, greatly lowering the cost and development barriers to implementing repositories for all institutions. The MIT software is not the only option available, although I believe it is the most general-purpose; for example, there is software from the University of Southampton in the U.K. <http://www.eprints.org/> designed more specifically for institutional or disciplinary repositories of papers, as opposed to arbitrary digital materials.
Over the past few months, I have had a number of opportunities to speak about the roles and significance of institutional repositories as a strategy for supporting the use of networked information to advance scholarship, notably at a workshop jointly sponsored by ARL, CNI, and SPARC in Washington, D.C., at the DSpace launch celebration at MIT, and at the University of Tennessee and the University of British Columbia. While video recordings of some of these events are available on the Net, this article is an attempt to summarize and articulate the views I've expressed at these various events about the nature and functions of institutional repositories and their role in transforming scholarship.
In my view, a university-based institutional repository is a set of services that a university offers to the members of its community for the management and dissemination of digital materials created by the institution and its community members. It is most essentially an organizational commitment to the stewardship of these digital materials, including long-term preservation where appropriate, as well as organization and access or distribution. While operational responsibility for these services may reasonably be situated in different organizational units at different universities, an effective institutional repository of necessity represents a collaboration among librarians, information technologists, archives and records managers, faculty, and university administrators and policymakers. At any given point in time, an institutional repository will be supported by a set of information technologies, but a key part of the services that comprise an institutional repository is the management of technological changes, and the migration of digital content from one set of technologies to the next as part of the...
Issues in crosswalking content metadata standards
- St
- M Pierre
- W P Laplant
St. Pierre, M., LaPlant, W.P.: Issues in crosswalking content metadata standards.
Inf. Stand. Q. (1999)
Metadata fundamentals for all librarians
- P Caplan
Caplan, P.: Metadata fundamentals for all librarians. American Library Association
(ALA), USA (2003)
Research Design: Pendekatan metode kualitatif, kuantitatif, dan campuran
- J Creswell
Creswell, J.: Research Design: Pendekatan metode kualitatif, kuantitatif, dan campuran. Pustaka Pelajar, Yogyakarta (2016)
Indonesia|Ranking Web of Universities: Webometrics ranks 30000 institutions
- Webometrics
- Info
)|Ranking Web of Repositories
- Webometrics
- Info
Penelitian kualitatif dan desain Riset: Memilih di antara lima pendekatan
- J Creswell
Creswell, J.: Penelitian kualitatif dan desain Riset: Memilih di antara lima pendekatan. Pustaka Pelajar, Yogyakarta (2015)