From sb at CS.MU.OZ.AU Tue Sep 2 01:08:21 2003 From: sb at CS.MU.OZ.AU (Steven Bird) Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2003 11:08:21 +1000 Subject: OLAC Repositories Standard: Call for review In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Thu, 2003-08-28 at 07:19, Heidi Johnson wrote: > My review of the OLAC Repositories document: > > I don't have any technical feedback other than "Good job!" It looks > fine to me, though I don't know when I'll be able to get AILLA into > compliance. > > There is a typo on page 6, section 6: "Regarding the granularity of > resources ... rather than having seperate repositories..." > ^^^^ Fixed, thanks Heidi. Does anyone else have feedback on this document? Is it ready for adoption as an OLAC Standard? Thanks, -Steven From nickt at PARADISEC.ORG.AU Tue Sep 2 01:37:37 2003 From: nickt at PARADISEC.ORG.AU (Nicholas Thieberger) Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2003 11:37:37 +1000 Subject: OLAC Repositories Standard: Call for review In-Reply-To: <1062464904.1820.90.camel@aviary> Message-ID: Dear Steven and Gary, Thanks for the invitation to comment on the OLAC Repositories standard. Despite having successfully established a static repository I think the process is fairly onerous as it stands. And while the promise of longterm beneffits is important, the need for immediate benefits may prevent some archives from engaging with the OLAC/OAI approach. The PARADISEC catalogue contains much more metadata than is provided for in the current OLAC repositories standard and it would be useful to be able to provide more detail to users. I expect the place to have discussed this is on the metadata list and I apologise for not having done so earlier. Our catalogue is in FMPro and we export the fields required via XSL to the OLAC compliant static repository. The XSL was written for us by Steven Bird. For our purposes we need to show potential depositors a catalogue of the metadata. If we point them to the OLAC site there is currently no facility to simply browse the contents of a particular repository. For example you can't search for its identifier here http://www.language-archives.org/tools/search.php4? and get all records from that repository (at least I can't, searching for paradisec, or paradisec.org.au, or pdsc). I understand that this facility will be built sometime by the LinguistList people and look forward to that happening. So while the repositories document in itself is fine, the actual implementation of its contents takes some doing! Nick -- Project Manager PARADISEC Pacific And Regional Archive for DIgital Sources in Endangered Cultures http://www.paradisec.org.au Project Manager nickt at paradisec.org.au Ph 61 (0)3 8344 5185 From badenh at CS.MU.OZ.AU Tue Sep 2 03:00:41 2003 From: badenh at CS.MU.OZ.AU (Baden Hughes) Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2003 13:00:41 +1000 Subject: OLAC Repositories Standard: Call for review In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > For our purposes we need to show potential depositors a catalogue of > the metadata. If we point them to the OLAC site there is currently no > facility to simply browse the contents of a particular repository. > For example you can't search for its identifier here > http://www.language-archives.org/tools/search.php4? and get all > records from that repository (at least I can't, searching for > paradisec, or paradisec.org.au, or pdsc). I understand that this > facility will be built sometime by the LinguistList people and look > forward to that happening. Hi Nick - You could try using an OLAC VISER query, like this (may wrap): http://www.language-archives.org/viser?elements=0&sql=OaiIdentifier+like+'oai:paradisec.org.au:%25'&title=Resources+Available+Through+Paradisec (You will need either Internet Explorer or Opera to view the results of the XML output) The VISER Documentation for constructing such queries is at http://www.language-archives.org/viser - if you like contact me offline to talk about how this could be leveraged to give you what you're after Regards Baden From sb at CS.MU.OZ.AU Wed Sep 3 11:52:03 2003 From: sb at CS.MU.OZ.AU (Steven Bird) Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2003 21:52:03 +1000 Subject: OLAC Repositories Standard: Call for review In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Tue, 2003-09-02 at 11:37, Nicholas Thieberger wrote: > Dear Steven and Gary, > > Thanks for the invitation to comment on the OLAC Repositories standard. > > Despite having successfully established a static repository I think > the process is fairly onerous as it stands. Agreed. The ORE editor on the LINGUIST site is meant to address this for small repositories. However, the Paradisec archive already exists in an FMPro database and needs to be exported to the static repository format. There's no way to protect such archive administrators from having to deal with XML and arcane XML validation tools. > And while the promise of > longterm beneffits is important, the need for immediate benefits may > prevent some archives from engaging with the OLAC/OAI approach. > > The PARADISEC catalogue contains much more metadata than is provided > for in the current OLAC repositories standard and it would be useful > to be able to provide more detail to users. I expect the place to > have discussed this is on the metadata list and I apologise for not > having done so earlier. Enriching OLAC metadata is an ongoing activity; anyone is free to propose a working group, develop a vocabulary, and put it through the OLAC Process. > For our purposes we need to show potential depositors a catalogue of > the metadata. If we point them to the OLAC site there is currently no > facility to simply browse the contents of a particular repository. > For example you can't search for its identifier here > http://www.language-archives.org/tools/search.php4? and get all > records from that repository (at least I can't, searching for > paradisec, or paradisec.org.au, or pdsc). I understand that this > facility will be built sometime by the LinguistList people and look > forward to that happening. The advanced OLAC search facility on the LINGUIST site permits users to restrict searches to particular archives, but not to list all records of a given archive. If you just specify and archive and hit the search button, it says: "Please enter one more search condition!!" I wonder if it is necessary to insist on an extra search condition when the archive has been specified. I've added the requested functionality to the OLAC Tools page. -Steven Bird From Gary_Simons at SIL.ORG Wed Sep 3 14:41:27 2003 From: Gary_Simons at SIL.ORG (Gary Simons) Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2003 09:41:27 -0500 Subject: OLAC Repositories Standard: Call for review Message-ID: Nick, One thing you recently wrote was: > The PARADISEC catalogue contains much more metadata than is provided > for in the current OLAC repositories standard and it would be useful > to be able to provide more detail to users. I expect the place to > have discussed this is on the metadata list and I apologise for not > having done so earlier. This has a standard answer in the world of DC-based metadata, namely, it is intended that you map multiple fields from your metadata catalog into the same DC field. For instance, you might five different fields regarding format that can all be mapped into the Format element. Typically, people use their own metadata field names as labels within the element content. E.g., Medium: CD-ROM, Channels: Stereo, Sampling rate: 44KHz, Depth: 24-bit When in doubt as to which element something should map to, you can always use . A particularly rich metadata catalog, could easily map a dozen fields into . While this approach limits the precision of potential queries, it has no inherent limit on how much of your metadata you can display to a user when they read one of your metadata records. -Gary From olac-admin at LANGUAGE-ARCHIVES.ORG Sat Sep 27 11:54:57 2003 From: olac-admin at LANGUAGE-ARCHIVES.ORG (Steven Bird) Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 21:54:57 +1000 Subject: OLAC Metadata Standard: Call for review Message-ID: Dear implementers of the OLAC Metadata standard, At our last workshop in December 2002 we established version 1.0 of the OLAC Metadata set. This document defines the format used by the OLAC repositories for the interchange of metadata within the framework of the Open Archives Initiative (OAI). The metadata set is based on Qualified Dublin Core, but the format allows for the use of extensions to express community-specific qualifiers ("OLAC extensions"). At present there are five OLAC extensions in use, for Discourse Types, Language Identification, Linguistic Field, Linguistic Data Types, and Participant Roles. Four of these are now documented as draft OLAC Recommendations, thanks to Heidi Johnson, Helen Aristar Dry and Michael Appleby [http://www.language-archives.org/REC/olac-extensions.html] OLAC Metadata is currently in Candidate status, and we feel it is now time to do the final processing to promote it to Adopted status. According to the OLAC Process, we are now issuing a call for review ``in which the community members who have actually put the document to use are invited to describe their experience and comment on whether it is ready to advance to adoption, potentially with changes they might recommend.'' Would you please read the OLAC Metadata document once more and direct feedback to this list or directly to us? Is it ready for adoption as an OLAC Standard, i.e. as a set of specifications that archives must follow when implementing an OLAC-compliant repository? Please respond by Friday 10 October at the latest. After this deadline, the OLAC Council will review your feedback and determine any final wording changes. If there is a consensus that the document is ready, the Council will approve it for adoption as an OLAC Standard. The document can be found at: http://www.language-archives.org/OLAC/metadata.html Thanks, Steven & Gary From sb at CS.MU.OZ.AU Tue Sep 2 01:08:21 2003 From: sb at CS.MU.OZ.AU (Steven Bird) Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2003 11:08:21 +1000 Subject: OLAC Repositories Standard: Call for review In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Thu, 2003-08-28 at 07:19, Heidi Johnson wrote: > My review of the OLAC Repositories document: > > I don't have any technical feedback other than "Good job!" It looks > fine to me, though I don't know when I'll be able to get AILLA into > compliance. > > There is a typo on page 6, section 6: "Regarding the granularity of > resources ... rather than having seperate repositories..." > ^^^^ Fixed, thanks Heidi. Does anyone else have feedback on this document? Is it ready for adoption as an OLAC Standard? Thanks, -Steven From nickt at PARADISEC.ORG.AU Tue Sep 2 01:37:37 2003 From: nickt at PARADISEC.ORG.AU (Nicholas Thieberger) Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2003 11:37:37 +1000 Subject: OLAC Repositories Standard: Call for review In-Reply-To: <1062464904.1820.90.camel@aviary> Message-ID: Dear Steven and Gary, Thanks for the invitation to comment on the OLAC Repositories standard. Despite having successfully established a static repository I think the process is fairly onerous as it stands. And while the promise of longterm beneffits is important, the need for immediate benefits may prevent some archives from engaging with the OLAC/OAI approach. The PARADISEC catalogue contains much more metadata than is provided for in the current OLAC repositories standard and it would be useful to be able to provide more detail to users. I expect the place to have discussed this is on the metadata list and I apologise for not having done so earlier. Our catalogue is in FMPro and we export the fields required via XSL to the OLAC compliant static repository. The XSL was written for us by Steven Bird. For our purposes we need to show potential depositors a catalogue of the metadata. If we point them to the OLAC site there is currently no facility to simply browse the contents of a particular repository. For example you can't search for its identifier here http://www.language-archives.org/tools/search.php4? and get all records from that repository (at least I can't, searching for paradisec, or paradisec.org.au, or pdsc). I understand that this facility will be built sometime by the LinguistList people and look forward to that happening. So while the repositories document in itself is fine, the actual implementation of its contents takes some doing! Nick -- Project Manager PARADISEC Pacific And Regional Archive for DIgital Sources in Endangered Cultures http://www.paradisec.org.au Project Manager nickt at paradisec.org.au Ph 61 (0)3 8344 5185 From badenh at CS.MU.OZ.AU Tue Sep 2 03:00:41 2003 From: badenh at CS.MU.OZ.AU (Baden Hughes) Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2003 13:00:41 +1000 Subject: OLAC Repositories Standard: Call for review In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > For our purposes we need to show potential depositors a catalogue of > the metadata. If we point them to the OLAC site there is currently no > facility to simply browse the contents of a particular repository. > For example you can't search for its identifier here > http://www.language-archives.org/tools/search.php4? and get all > records from that repository (at least I can't, searching for > paradisec, or paradisec.org.au, or pdsc). I understand that this > facility will be built sometime by the LinguistList people and look > forward to that happening. Hi Nick - You could try using an OLAC VISER query, like this (may wrap): http://www.language-archives.org/viser?elements=0&sql=OaiIdentifier+like+'oai:paradisec.org.au:%25'&title=Resources+Available+Through+Paradisec (You will need either Internet Explorer or Opera to view the results of the XML output) The VISER Documentation for constructing such queries is at http://www.language-archives.org/viser - if you like contact me offline to talk about how this could be leveraged to give you what you're after Regards Baden From sb at CS.MU.OZ.AU Wed Sep 3 11:52:03 2003 From: sb at CS.MU.OZ.AU (Steven Bird) Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2003 21:52:03 +1000 Subject: OLAC Repositories Standard: Call for review In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Tue, 2003-09-02 at 11:37, Nicholas Thieberger wrote: > Dear Steven and Gary, > > Thanks for the invitation to comment on the OLAC Repositories standard. > > Despite having successfully established a static repository I think > the process is fairly onerous as it stands. Agreed. The ORE editor on the LINGUIST site is meant to address this for small repositories. However, the Paradisec archive already exists in an FMPro database and needs to be exported to the static repository format. There's no way to protect such archive administrators from having to deal with XML and arcane XML validation tools. > And while the promise of > longterm beneffits is important, the need for immediate benefits may > prevent some archives from engaging with the OLAC/OAI approach. > > The PARADISEC catalogue contains much more metadata than is provided > for in the current OLAC repositories standard and it would be useful > to be able to provide more detail to users. I expect the place to > have discussed this is on the metadata list and I apologise for not > having done so earlier. Enriching OLAC metadata is an ongoing activity; anyone is free to propose a working group, develop a vocabulary, and put it through the OLAC Process. > For our purposes we need to show potential depositors a catalogue of > the metadata. If we point them to the OLAC site there is currently no > facility to simply browse the contents of a particular repository. > For example you can't search for its identifier here > http://www.language-archives.org/tools/search.php4? and get all > records from that repository (at least I can't, searching for > paradisec, or paradisec.org.au, or pdsc). I understand that this > facility will be built sometime by the LinguistList people and look > forward to that happening. The advanced OLAC search facility on the LINGUIST site permits users to restrict searches to particular archives, but not to list all records of a given archive. If you just specify and archive and hit the search button, it says: "Please enter one more search condition!!" I wonder if it is necessary to insist on an extra search condition when the archive has been specified. I've added the requested functionality to the OLAC Tools page. -Steven Bird From Gary_Simons at SIL.ORG Wed Sep 3 14:41:27 2003 From: Gary_Simons at SIL.ORG (Gary Simons) Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2003 09:41:27 -0500 Subject: OLAC Repositories Standard: Call for review Message-ID: Nick, One thing you recently wrote was: > The PARADISEC catalogue contains much more metadata than is provided > for in the current OLAC repositories standard and it would be useful > to be able to provide more detail to users. I expect the place to > have discussed this is on the metadata list and I apologise for not > having done so earlier. This has a standard answer in the world of DC-based metadata, namely, it is intended that you map multiple fields from your metadata catalog into the same DC field. For instance, you might five different fields regarding format that can all be mapped into the Format element. Typically, people use their own metadata field names as labels within the element content. E.g., Medium: CD-ROM, Channels: Stereo, Sampling rate: 44KHz, Depth: 24-bit When in doubt as to which element something should map to, you can always use . A particularly rich metadata catalog, could easily map a dozen fields into . While this approach limits the precision of potential queries, it has no inherent limit on how much of your metadata you can display to a user when they read one of your metadata records. -Gary From olac-admin at LANGUAGE-ARCHIVES.ORG Sat Sep 27 11:54:57 2003 From: olac-admin at LANGUAGE-ARCHIVES.ORG (Steven Bird) Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2003 21:54:57 +1000 Subject: OLAC Metadata Standard: Call for review Message-ID: Dear implementers of the OLAC Metadata standard, At our last workshop in December 2002 we established version 1.0 of the OLAC Metadata set. This document defines the format used by the OLAC repositories for the interchange of metadata within the framework of the Open Archives Initiative (OAI). The metadata set is based on Qualified Dublin Core, but the format allows for the use of extensions to express community-specific qualifiers ("OLAC extensions"). At present there are five OLAC extensions in use, for Discourse Types, Language Identification, Linguistic Field, Linguistic Data Types, and Participant Roles. Four of these are now documented as draft OLAC Recommendations, thanks to Heidi Johnson, Helen Aristar Dry and Michael Appleby [http://www.language-archives.org/REC/olac-extensions.html] OLAC Metadata is currently in Candidate status, and we feel it is now time to do the final processing to promote it to Adopted status. According to the OLAC Process, we are now issuing a call for review ``in which the community members who have actually put the document to use are invited to describe their experience and comment on whether it is ready to advance to adoption, potentially with changes they might recommend.'' Would you please read the OLAC Metadata document once more and direct feedback to this list or directly to us? Is it ready for adoption as an OLAC Standard, i.e. as a set of specifications that archives must follow when implementing an OLAC-compliant repository? Please respond by Friday 10 October at the latest. After this deadline, the OLAC Council will review your feedback and determine any final wording changes. If there is a consensus that the document is ready, the Council will approve it for adoption as an OLAC Standard. The document can be found at: http://www.language-archives.org/OLAC/metadata.html Thanks, Steven & Gary