In contrast to the principle of metadata simplicity and sufficiency, the principle of metadata enriching can be considered a departure from traditional cataloguing approaches where the focus was on metadata simplicity. Metadata created and managed following the principle of metadata enriching better responds to users’ needs. Whilst the principle of enriching results in a potential abundance of metadata, the principle of filtering is used to simplify its presentation by enabling a user-centred/focused/led design.
Organic Name Reactions for the students and aspirants of Chemistry12th.pptx
From the principle of sufficiency and necessity to metadata enriching
1. From the principle of sufficiency and
necessity to metadata enriching
Getaneh Alemu
Cataloguing & Metadata Librarian
Solent University
8th December 2021
2. CATALOGUING PRINCIPLES
• The principle of sufficiency and necessity
• The principle of user convenience
• The principle of representation
• The principle of standardisation (Svenonius, 2000; IFLA, 2009)
IFLA (2009). Statement of international cataloguing principles. Retrieved from https://www.ifla.org/files/assets/cataloguing/icp/icp_2009-en.pdf
Svenonius, E. (2000). The intellectual foundation of information organization. Cambridge, Mass. : MIT Press.
3. T H E P R I N C I P L E O F S U F F I C I E N C Y A N D N E C E S S I T Y
• Pioneers of library cataloguing such as Cutter, Panizzi and Lubetzky are said to have advocated for
a metadata approach that caters for simplicity (Svenonius, 2000)
• IFLA used this principle to underpin the design of its Functional Requirements for Bibliographic
Records (FRBR) model
• IFLA’s principle of economy
(IFLA, 2009; Hoffman, 2009; OCLC, 2009; Spiteri, 2012; Svenonius, 2000)
IFLA (2009). Statement of international cataloguing principles. Retrieved from https://www.ifla.org/files/assets/cataloguing/icp/icp_2009-en.pdf
Svenonius, E. (2000). The intellectual foundation of information organization. Cambridge, Mass. : MIT Press.
4. I F L A S ’ S S TAT E M E N T O F I N T E R N AT I O N A L C ATA L O G U I N G P R I N C I P L E S
( I F L A , 2 0 0 9 )
5. T H E P R I N C I P L E O F S U F F I C I E N C Y A N D N E C E S S I T Y
• “Only those data elements in descriptions and controlled forms of names for
access that are required to fulfil user tasks and are essential to uniquely
identify an entity should be included” (IFLA, 2009, p.2)
• “Slash elements deemed bibliographically insignificant” (Svenonius, 2000, p.76)
• No extraneous data
• Metadata that was considered superfluous was eliminated, resulting in
metadata simplicity
6. OCCAM’S RAZOR
• "Entities are not to be multiplied without necessity" (William of Ockham, c1287-1347)
• "Plurality is not to be posited without necessity“ (John Duns, c1265-1308)
• "If a thing can be done adequately by means of one, it is superfluous to do it by
means of several” (Thomas Aquinas, 1225 -1274)
https://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/General/occam.html
http://abyss.uoregon.edu/~js/glossary/occams_razor.html
7. OCCAM’S RAZOR
• User, author and machine generated metadata disregarded
• Reliance on one or two international subject headings and authorities
• Objective was to simplify the catalogue, save space and time
• AACR2
• Coats of arms, facsimiles, forms, genealogical tables, maps, music, plans,
and portraits – to be indicated by “ill. (Svenonius, 2000)
• Minimal data element sets
11. LIMITATION OF STANDARDS
Growing library collections
Ever changing technologies
Changing user expectations
Resources (books) often lend themselves to various interpretations and contexts
“The social space of documents is missing” (Paul Otlet in 1931, cited Wright,
2007)
12. • Human beings, by nature, do not always agree on a single about-ness, interpretation and
classification of things (Shirky, 2008; Weinberger, 2007).
• Metadata is affected by socio-cultural, linguistic, and political factors (Bowker & Star,
1999)
• Metadata is an approximation to the things it represents (Gartner, 2016)
• “Today’s category easily becomes tomorrow’s embarrassment” (Weinberger, 2007)
• Each standard and each category valorises some point of view and silences another”
(Bowker and Star, 1999)
METADATA DIVERSITY
13. "The solution to the information overload problem is to create more metadata“ (Weinberger,
2007)
“If a library is a growing organism, it follows that the library catalogue will also be a growing
one. The rate of growth of the catalogue may be said to be six times the rate of growth of the
number of books, as a book requires six entries on average” (Ranganathan, 1957, p.444)
• Metadata diversity better conforms to users’ needs
• Metadata enriching addresses this problem by allowing multiple metadata agents – including
authors, publishers, librarians, machines and users
METADATA DIVERSITY
14. CONTENT VS INTERFACE
Delineation between content (enriching) and discovery (filtering)
Simplicity is a usability concern
Peter Morville's (2004) User Experience Honeycomb (Source:
http://semanticstudios.com/user_experience_design/)
Nielsen (2012) uses the following usability
criteria:
• Satisfaction – Does it solve problems?
• Learnability – is it easy to learn and use?
• Efficiency – does it save time?
• Degree of errors – is it free from errors?
• Memorability – is it easy to remember?
17. M E TA D ATA F I LT E R I N G
Maeda, J. (2006). Laws of Simplicity. MIT Press.
“More appears like less by simply moving it far, far away. Thus an experience is made simpler by
keeping the result local, and moving the actual work to a faraway location” (Maeda, 2006).
18. USER SEARCH BEHAVIOURS ACTIONS
Users search and browsing behaviours
• Non-linear
• Iterative
• Dynamic
• Evolving (Bates, 1989)
Users employ various techniques
• Searching
• Browsing
• Footnote chasing
• Citation searching
• Journal run
• Area scanning (Bates, 1989)
A berrypicking, evolving search model (Bates, 1989)
19. Kuhlthau (1991) model (user-centred):
• Initiation (recognise information need)
• Selection (identify general topic)
• Exploration, formulation
• Collection (gather information on the subject)
• Presentation (complete information search)
USER SEARCH BEHAVIOURS ACTIONS
Users entertaining multiple thoughts
and actions :
• Dilemma
• Confidence
• Confusion
• Uncertainty
• Satisfaction
• Dissatisfaction (Kuhlthau, 1991)
22. METADATA ENRICHING
• Enriching as a new metadata principle in contrast the principle of metadata sufficiency and
necessity
• Metadata enriching is about continuously enhancing the effectiveness of your discovery
services or any information management function through a methodical creation, ingesting,
updating, correcting, cleaning, linking, sharing, and re-using your metadata
• It is a conceptual framework to support an iterative, continuous, and community-driven effort
of ensuring your metadata is consistent, accurate, rich, and valuable.
33. 3 3
Ontology
Equivale
nt
relation
ship
Different
values
Associative
relationship
Broad
er
relatio
nship
Narrow
er
relatio
nship
Inverse
relation
ship
Transitive
relationship
Symmetric
relationship Domain
Rang
e Constraints
Alter
nativ
e
nam
e Annotation
OWL
sameAs
owl:equi
valentCl
ass
owl:differen
tFrom
owl:inve
rseOf
owl:Transitiv
eProperty
owl:Symmet
ricProperty
minCardinality
maxCardinality
unionOf
intersectionOf
complementOf
one of
owl:versionIn
fo
SKOS
sameAs
exactMa
tch
related
relatedMatch
closeMatch
broadMatch
narrowMatch
topCo
ncept
Of
hasTop
Concep
t
altLa
bel
scopeNote
historyNote
note
vhangeNote
definition
editorialNote
example
RDFS rdfs:seeAlso
rdf:cla
ss
rdf:sub
ClassOf
rdf:sub
Propert
yOf
rdfs:do
main
rdfs:r
ange
rdf:A
lt
rdfs:comment
rdfs:label
rdfs:isDefined
By
Schema.o
rg sameAs
inverseO
f
domain
Include
s
range
Inclu
des
alter
nate
Nam
e description
ENRICHING USING ONTOLOGIES
38. LIBRARY SYSTEMS – AS PLATFORMS
• Library software as a platform
• Integration and Interoperability
• Cloud-based applications (Library Apps, APIs)
• Community idea, metadata exchange and
development
39. ENRICHING
• Enhancing existing metadata quality
• Transforming semi-structured data into structured data
• Extending access points (Zeng, 2019)
40. ENRICH THEN FILTER
In the final analysis, metadata that is enriched, linked, open
and filtered drives usage of resources; and this needs to be our
value proposition as cataloguers and metadata experts.
41. B I B L I O G R A P H Y
Alemu, G., & Stevens, B. (2015). An emergent theory of digital library metadata: Enrich then filter. Waltham, Massachusetts: Chandos
Publishing.
Bates, M. J. (1989). The Design of Browsing and Berrypicking Techniques for the Online Search Interface. Online Review, 13, 5, 407-24.
Retrieved from https://pages.gseis.ucla.edu/faculty/bates/berrypicking.html
British Library. (2018). British Library data model. Retrieved from http://www.bl.uk/bibliographic/pdfs/bldatamodelbook.pdf
Calhoun, K. (2014). Exploring digital libraries: Foundations, practice, prospects. London: Facet Publishing.
Carpenter, T. (2017). Enriching book metadata is marketing in the digital age. Scholarly Kitchen. Retrieved from
https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2017/12/07/enriching-metadata-is-marketing/
Clarke, M and Harley, P. (2014). How Smart Is Your Content? Using Semantic Enrichment to Improve Your User Experience and Your Bottom
Line. Science Editor. Vol. 37. Jan. 2014, pp. 40–44.
Cousins, S. (2019). NBK data model. Retrieved from https://libraryservices.jiscinvolve.org/wp/2019/04/nbk-data-model/
Daquino, M., Mambelli, Peroni, Tomasi, & Vitali. (2017). Enhancing Semantic Expressivity in the Cultural Heritage Domain: Exposing the Zeri
Photo Archive as Linked Open Data. Journal on Computing and Cultural Heritage (JOCCH), 10(4), 1-21.
DATASIFT. (2019). Our data enrichments. Retrieved from https://datasift.com/platform/data-enrichments/
de Boer, V., Melgar, L., Inel, O., Ortiz, C. M., Aroyo, L., & Oomen, J. (2017). Enriching media collections for event-based exploration. In E.
Garoufallou, S. Virkus, R. Siatri & D. Koutsomiha (Eds.), Metadata and semantic research: 11th international conference, MTSR 2017, Tallinn,
Estonia, November 28 – December 1, 2017, Proceedings (pp. 189-201). Cham: Springer International Publishing. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-70863-
8_18 Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70863-8_18
De Rosa, C. (2006). College students' perceptions of libraries and information resources: A report to the OCLC membership. Dublin, Ohio: OCLC
Online Computer Library Center. Retrieved from https://www.oclc.org/content/dam/oclc/reports/pdfs/Percept_all.pdf
Dunsire, G., Harper, C., Hillmann, D., & Phipps, J. (2012, Linked data vocabulary management: Infrastructure support, data integration, and
interoperability. Information Standards Quarterly, 24, 4-13. Retrieved from
https://search.proquest.com/docview/1709495584?accountid=13969
Europeana.eu (2016). Definition of the Europeana Data Model v5.2.7. Retrieved from
https://pro.europeana.eu/files/Europeana_Professional/Share_your_data/Technical_requirements/EDM_Documentation/EDM_Definition_v5.2
.7_042016.pdf
42. B I B L I O G R A P H Y
IFLA (2009). Statement of international cataloguing principles. Retrieved from https://www.ifla.org/files/assets/cataloguing/icp/icp_2009-en.pdf
Haynes, D. (2018). Metadata for information management and retrieval : Understanding metadata and its use. London: Facet Publishing
IXXUS. (2019). Semantic Enrichment. Retrieved from https://www.ixxus.com/solutions/semantic-enrichment/
Kroeger, A. (2013). The road to BIBFRAME: The evolution of the idea of bibliographic transition into a post-MARC future. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 51(8),
873-890. doi:10.1080/01639374.2013.823584
Lagoze, C. (2010). Lost identity: The assimilation of digital libraries into the web Available from Lost Identity: the Assimilation of Digital Libraries into the Web.
Retrieved from http://www.cs.cornell.edu/lagoze/dissertation/CarlLagoze.pdf
Library of Congress. (2019). ID.LOC.GOV – Linked Data Service. Retrieved from http://id.loc.gov/
Meadows, A. (2019). Better metadata could help save the world! Scholarly Kitchen. Retrieved from https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2019/06/11/better-metadata-
could-help-save-the-world/
Metadata2020.org Retrieved from http://www.metadata2020.org/
Mitchell, E. T., PhD. (2015). The current state of linked data in libraries, archives, and museums. Library Technology Reports, 52(1), 16,2.
Nielsen, J. (2001). Usability 101: Introduction to Usability. Retrieved from: https://www.nngroup.com/articles/usability-101-introduction-to-usability/
O'Beirne, R. (2017). Academic libraries, open access and digital scholarship–a Delphi study (Doctoral dissertation, University of Sheffield).
Park, J., Richards, L. and Brenza, A. (2018), "Benefits and challenges of BIBFRAME", Library Hi Tech, Vol. https://doi.org/10.1108/LHT-08-2017-0176
Pennington, D. R., & In Spiteri, L. F. (2019). Social tagging in a linked data environment. London: Facet Publishing.
Perrin, J. M., Clark, M., De-Leon, E., and Edgar, L. (2014). Usability Testing for Greater Impact: A Primo Case Study. Information Technology and
Libraries, 33(4), pp. 57–66. Retrieved from: http://ejournals.bc.edu/ojs/index.php/ital/article/view/5174
Perruso, C. (2015). Undergraduates' Use of Google vs. Library Resources: A Four-Year Cohort Study. Retrieved: http://crl.acrl.org/content/early/2015/11/05/crl15-
826.full.pdf
Shirky, C. (2008). Here comes everybody: The power of organizing without organizations. London: Allen Lane.
Svenonius, E. (2000). The intellectual foundation of information organization. Cambridge, Mass. : MIT Press.
Ullah, I., Khusro, S., Ullah, A., & Naeem, M. (2018). An Overview of the Current State of Linked and Open Data in Cataloging. Information Technology and
Libraries, 37(4), 47-80. https://doi.org/10.6017/ital.v37i4.10432
van Hooland, S., & Verborgh, R. (2014). Linked data for libraries, archives and museums: How to clean, link and publish your metadata. London: Facet Publishing.
Weinberger, D. (2005). Tagging and Why It Matters. Retrieved from http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/sites/cyber.law.harvard.edu/files/07-WhyTaggingMatters.pdf
Weinberger, D. (2007). Everything Is Miscellaneous. New York: Times books.
Weinberger, D. (2012). Too Big to Know: Rethinking Knowledge Now That the Facts Aren't the Facts, Experts Are Everywhere, and the Smartest Person in the Room Is the Room. New
York: Basic Books
Xu, A., Hess, K., & Akerman, L. (2018). From MARC to BIBFRAME 2.0: Crosswalks. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 56(2-3), 224-250.
doi:10.1080/01639374.2017.1388326
Zeng, M. L., & Qin, J. (2016). Metadata (2nd ed.). London: Facet Publishing.
Zeng, M.L. (2019) ‘Semantic enrichment for enhancing LAM data and supporting digital humanities’, El profesional de la información, Vol. 28, No. 1.