Getting Started with CONTENTdm Corey Harper, University of Oregon Terry Reese, Oregon State...

Getting Started with CONTENTdm

Corey Harper, University of Oregon

Terry Reese, Oregon State University

OLA - April 8, 2005

Terry Reese - Corey Harper Oregon Library Association - April 8, 2005

Road Map

Introduction to CONTENTdm's field properties and search interfaces Determining important access points Discussion of Dublin Core mapping CONTENTdm's controlled vocabulary structure Setting up controlled vocabularies Use of home grown vocabularies Metadata interoperability Shared standards and best practices Western States Best Practices Working with Western Waters Managing control vocabularies between projects Demo some of OSU and UO's collections Q&A


Introducing CONTENTdm

Search Interfaces 3+-3.8 provides three primary search interfaces

1. Browse Search2. Advance Search3. Custom Search

4 display methods Grid view Bibiographic view Thumbnail view Title view


Introducing CONTENTdm: Browse Interface

Browses all items in the collection Browse ordered alphebetically

No skip characters (the, a, I, an used to determine order)

The pages of CONTENTdm Compound objects are not show in the browse interface.


Introducing CONTENTdm: Browse Interface (Grid view)


Introducing CONTENTdm: Browse Interface (Thumbnail view)


Introducing CONTENTdm: Browse Interface (Bibliographic view)


Introducing CONTENTdm: Browse Interface (Title view)


Introducing CONTENTdm: Browse Interface (Custom view)

Hyperlink Example


Introducing CONTENTdm: Advanced Interface

Two types of searches Searching across all fields Searching on a particular field






Introducing CONTENTdm: Setting up field properties

Field properties set in the administration area





Dublin Core Mappings

Data Types:Text

Date (format: dd/mm/yyyy)

Full Text Search (OCR’d data)

TitleSubjectDescriptionCreatorPublisherContributorsDateTypeFormatIdentifierSourceLanguageRelationCoverageRightsAudienceTitle-AlternativeDescription-Table Of ContentsDescription-AbstractDate-CreatedDate-ValidDate-AvailableDate-IssuedDate-ModifiedFormat-ExtentFormat-MediumRelation-Is Version OfRelation-Has VersionRelation-Is Replaced ByRelation-ReplacesRelation-Is Required ByRelation-RequiresRelation-Is Part OfRelation-Has PartRelation-Is Referenced ByRelation-ReferencesRelation-Is Format OfRelation-Has Format OfRelation-Conforms ToCoverage-SpatialCoverage-TemporalAudience-MediatorNone


Introducing CONTENTdm: Starting a project

What do we scan? The first and most important part of the

collection building process. Every institution has great stuff to digitize but…. Digital collections need to be treated like

traditional materials, i.e., are vetted or proposed by an organization’s subject specialist.



Working with stakeholders: Working with your subject specialists can help

you to identify:1. Organizational stakeholders (departments, groups,

etc.)

2. Outside stakeholders (both public and private)

3. Field specific thesauri and classification terms that may be able to be incorporated into the project.



Determining access points: What metadata will be present? How will it be entered? What best practices or standards will be used in

generating the metadata? What metadata will your stakeholders expect to be

present? What metadata elements will be searchable? Which

will use controlled vocabulary? How will your administrative metadata be stored?



Access points into the collection: Once the collection has been built – how will it

be accessed? Search types? Example:

http://digitalcollections.library.oregonstate.edu/archives/

http://digitalcollections.library.oregonstate.edu/dna/


Mapping to Dublin Core

15 Dublin Core Elements 16th element – Audience 26 Qualified DC Elements (from dcterms

namespace) None – Special value – field is not mapped


Dublin Core Mapping


OAI-PMH

Open Archives Initiative Protocol for Metadata Harvesting

I’ll be talking about this some, as will Terry OAI-PMH is a protocol, layered over HTTP Response format encoded as XML Defines format for requests and responses used for

harvesting metadata from collections Used to build federated search interfaces http://www.openarchives.org/


Some notes on mapping

Effect on searching – across collections, search based on DC Mapping

Effect on OAI output 15 elements and nothing more. Qualified elements “dumb down” to Simple DC “none” and “Audience” aren’t included in OAI

results


More on Mapping

Collaborative projects should determine what information to map to Dublin Core fields

Western States documentation provides guidance on mapping

Effect on search results at centralized search interfaces, e.g. Western Waters


Effects of Bad Mapping

Poor mapping decisions can cause problems Cluttered results in cross collection searches Cluttered results in federated searching Inconsistency in where pieces of information are

found Important information not harvested


Decisions are rarely final

CONTENTdm is extremely flexible Can easily change mappings, indexing, display,

vocabularies Can add and delete fields at any time

This can be both good and bad


Editing Field Properties






Controlled Vocabularies in CONTENTdm

Supports SEE FROM type cross-references No support for SEE ALSO or hierarchical

(BT, NT, RT) One term per line in a text file Cross-references: x-ref USE heading


Vocabularies on the Server

Stored as text files in vocab folder: [nickname].txt; e.g. subjec.txt

Additional vocabulary files stored in the text_search folder: voc.[nickname] – Vocabulary terms used in instance data use.[nickname] – X-refs to terms used in instance data vocuse.[nickname] – Both terms and X-refs


Vocabulary Index Generator

Terry’s PHP Script to create hyperlinked lists of vocabulary terms: http://oregonstate.edu/~reeset/contentdm

/downloads.html

Excellent for “Browse by Subject” pages Configurable to include x-refs Other useful tools available at this URL


Available Vocabularies

Software comes with TGM-I LCSH and MeSH available from User Support

Center (requires login) MeSH – 29,000 entries – headings only LCSH – 156,411 entries – 64,959 headings &

91,452 x-refs. X-Refs include 400, 410, 411 and 450 references from

authority records coded as 150 with 008 bit 09 “a”


Vocabulary Administration


Vocabulary Administration


Vocabulary Verification


Other Vocabularies

Adding terms to existing vocabularies Be careful: update when new versions available

Creating CONTENTdm formated versions of other vocabularies: DC Type MIME Type GSFAD

Creating home-grown vocabularies from scratch


Home Grown Vocabularies

May be useful to combine vocabularies or create new ones. Example – Combining terms from GSFAD &

from TGM-II (GMGPC) Controlling a list of Collection Names,

Collection Identifiers, Source Conditions, etc.

Generating Vocabs from a fields contents


Temporary Vocabularies

Instance data for fields using vocabularies Term A; Term B; Term C

Use same syntax for non-controlled fields that contain multiple entries repeatable fields in the DC sense

Create vocabs from field contents for normalization and quality control Browse the defined vocabulary to locate problems


CONTENTdm and metadata interoperability

Issues to consider: Interoperability between metadata formats

Dublin Core => MARC, etc. Interacting with federated searching

Interacting with federated search tools Understanding how your metadata could be

harvested via OAI.


CONTENTdm and metadata interoperability

Building federated collections: By considering metadata interoperability you

can build federated tools based on OAI: http://fluffy.library.oregonstate.edu/contentdm/searc

h/index.php Build tools that integrate with other federated

search tools: http://fluffy.library.oregonstate.edu/a9/search.php


Shared standards and best practices

Metadata interoperability and shared standards go hand in hand.

Shared standards are essentially a “trust” contract between groups of users that their metadata will conform to a specific set of rules.

Examples: MARC & AACR2


Shared standards: western waters best practices

Shared digital library standards: Western states Dublin Core best practices

http://www.cdpheritage.org/resource/metadata/wsdcmbp/


Working with Western Waters

Western Waters Digital Library – Federated CONTENTdm catalog of 12 academic libraries.

Projects contributed to the WWDL require metadata that meets both local and consortial standards.

As with any consortial arrangement – compromise is sometimes going to be necessary.


Working with Western Waters

More stuff


Managing controlled vocabularies between projects

CONTENTdm has no built-in facility to share controlled vocabularies between projects.

Two methods: 1) use Unix diff function to locate differences

between in use vocab. between projects and then manually adding missing elements or correcting conficts between projects.


Managing controlled vocabularies between projects

2. Build your own management:1. Example:

http://fluffy.library.oregonstate.edu/contentdm/builder.html


Demo Collections

Content


Q/A


Contact Us

Terry Reese - [email protected] Corey Harper – [email protected]

Date post:	29-Dec-2015
Category:	Documents
Upload:	maximillian-cox
View:	212 times
Download:	0 times

Getting Started with CONTENTdm Corey Harper, University of Oregon Terry Reese, Oregon State...

Documents