I’m about to run for an airport (this is probably the single phrase I utter the most in the course of a month, alas), so I only had time to take a quick look at Libguides, but it looks very interesting. It aims to let librarians (and others) share their wisdom and insight, while engaging the community of readers. Interesting! (Thanks to Karen Schneider for the link, via a tweet. And, congratulations to Karen on her new job!)

[Tags: libraries metadata expertise everything_is_miscellaneous ]

1 Comment »

That’s the apt title of a post by ZA3038 that provides an interesting overview of the Open Archives Initiative, about which I know, um, let’s see, carry the one…embarrassingly nothing:

At its core, the OAI promotes interoperability between different systems by supplying a rigorous set of standards that facilitate the sharing of digital information.

The post says “the original and continued focus of the OAI is on…research and journal articles.” Why hasn’t it caught on? ZA3038 suggests a few reasons. It seems like a reasonable consideration of an interesting metadata-based aggregation service.

[Tags: open_archives_initiative oai metadata open_access ]

Be the first to comment »

ISO’s taking over of Microsoft’s 8,000 page specification of the “open” standard based on Word’s document model has been slashdotted with typical, um, vigor.

[Tags: ooxml standards iso microsoft odf ]

Be the first to comment »

A librarians’ group is meeting today at the Berkman Center to talk about the future of libraries. Gene Koo, Jake Shapiro, and Melanie
Dulong de Rosnay, all of the Berkman.

I’m supposed to give a discussion-opener later this afternoon. Here are the notes of what I’m thinking of saying:

– Two themes
   – metadata over content
   – socializing of knowledge

– Knowledge as content
   – K was a quality of a belief
   – Became content esp. with books
      – Good fit because K was believed to be universal, single and eternal – permanence of books
         – Christian belief in a single universal truth
   – Books created:
      – topics as self-contained
      – experts as containers

– Web/Net
   – Primary characteristic: Abundance
      – Abundance of good is scarier than abundance of crap
      – Web invented to deal with abundance by giving us links…gives human-mediated shape to the endless sea
   – Links destroy container model
   – Web as social realm leads to socialization of K

– Socialization of K is all about metadata
   – e.g., this is worth reading, this is wrong, this connects to that
   – Paper-based metadata throws out info
      – Digital includes it all
      – Means that in general we get good enough info (but is that good enough?)
   – What does this mean for digital libraries?
      – Library is all metadata
      – distributed content
      – Place for expert and social knowing

Question: Digital libraries have nothing in common with libraries?

(Pardon the compressed form. These are my notes.) [Tags: libraries everything_is_miscellaneous ]

6 Comments »

Here are photos of an actual IT protest demonstration in Norway. How often do you see that? (Answer: This is the second IT protest demonstration in Norway’s history.)

Steve Pepper, Chairman of the Norwegian ISO committee since 1995, gave a speech that explains why standard document formats are important and why the adoption of Microsoft’s specification — OOXML — as an ISO standard was a bad mistake. There’s also bloggage here, which links to a podcast I have not yet listened to.

Steve has stepped down as chair of the Standard Norway committee in protest of the overall committee’s process. Steve told me about what happened when we had dinner in Oslo last week. It sounds pretty gruesome.

Says Steve, 80% of the committee was apparently against changing Norway’s vote from No to Yes, but that wasn’t close enough to consensus, so everyone had to leave the room except for three administrators and four technical experts, the latter conveniently chosen to get the balance down to 50-50. When there still wasn’t consensus (surprise, surprise), the experts were dismissed and the Vice President of Standard Norway just decided the way he wanted.

Steve believes the 8,000 page spec (!) should not have been “fast-tracked,” and that ISO voted in favor of the Microsoft spec in part because it didn’t want to leave it in the hands of Ecma (a semi-competing standards body). Yet, OOXML is pretty much nothing but Word’s document model with a whole bunch of angle brackets added…overly complex and too tied to Word’s peculiar capabilities. Meanwhile, we have a truly open and well-worked out document standard in ODF. (Get yer copy of Open Office here — it’s free and it works real good.)

This matters a lot, for two basic reasons. First, the world runs on documents so we want to be able to interchange them without even having to think about which application made them. Having two standards vitiates much of the point of having a standard. Second, OOXML is so tied to Word that having it be an official ISO standard gives one vendor (guess which) a market advantage that truly open standards should take away: You should be able to pick the word processor you want based on its features and feel, without having to worry if using it will lock your documents out of the worldwide market of ideas and information.

Steve tells me that the battle to reverse the Norwegian decision is continuing, and he urges that irregularities in other countries be similarly investigated. [Tags: ooxml steve_pepper norway iso ecma microsoft standards]

2 Comments »

Steve Pepper begins by talking about Vannevar Bush, whose influence on the Web has been profound. Bush was concerned with finding info, says Steve. His aim was to model how we find info on how the human mind works, i.e., by association. But, says Steve, Bush’s memex revolved entirely around documents, which is not how we think. [Caution: Live-blogging!]

Documents are about subjects. Subjects exist as concepts in our brains. They’re connected by a network of associations. Docs are how we happen to capture and communicate ideas. “Hypertext has been barking up the wrong tree” ever since the memex. (Steve then couches this more softly, acknowledging how much he loves the Web, etc.) We should be organizing information around topics/subjects, not around documents.

Why? Because topic maps reflect how we think. That’s why topic maps are ideal fo web sites. They’re subject-based associative. See topicmaps.com.

Steve counters the impression that topic maps are a portal technology. They were invented in 1991, before the Web. They “just turned out to be ideal for the purpose.” Until recently, they were mainly used for portals, but now they’re used increasingly to represent domains of knowledge. TMs are bigger than Topics, Associations, and Occurrences (TAO), for knowledge has a context. The concept of scope enables the rexpression of contextual validity, enabling multiple viewpoints. This makes topic maps more than a simple semantic tech. Semantics are decontextualized meaning, whereas pragmatics is contextuaiized meaning. See www.hoyre.no

Merging “is the single most powerful feature of topic maps.” Merging was the original motivation for topic maps, merging multiple indexes. It enables a “global knowledge federation.” You can arbitrarily merge any two topic maps. That can’t be done with relational databases or XML documents. But how to make it useful? It vcan’t be done by relying on names since every subject has multiple names, says Steve. The only solution for computers is identifiers. A topic in a topic map is a symbol that represents something in the real world, says Steve. He quotes the ISO definition: “A subject is any ‘thing’ whatsoever, whether or not it exists or has any other specific characteristics, about which anything whatsoever may be asserted by any means whatsoever.”

Meaning is expressed through the relationship between the representation and that to which it refers. Subject identifiers are central to topic maps. For example, which Steve Pepper wrote the letter of protest to the ISO committee? There’s a Steve Pepper in NJ who has a CD called “The Information Age.” But if you look at the metadata on the PDF of Steve’s letter, there’s a URI that describes Steve. This allows humans to disambiguate. At the moment there’s no good way to register such identities. “PSIs [Published Subject Identifiers] are perhaps not the final answer, but they’re a pretty good stopgap” and can easily be remapped if something else turns out to be the answer.

Steve ends by asking Microsoft to become more subject-centric. Windows is highly document-centric he says. He wants a desktop that shows him the subjects and topics he cares about, rather than folders and apps. Although there are some Semantic Web people working on a semantic desktop, Steve thinks Topic Maps is better for human-facing representations of knowledge. Why not have an entire subject-centric operating system, he asks: NLP for categorizing docukents, p2p, facilities for merges, etc.

Topic maps started out as a way to merge indexes, Steve says. It turned into a knowledge representation formalism. Now it’s the flag-bearer for subject-centric computing. Subject-centric computing is a paradigm shift, Steve says, comparing it to object-oriented programming, and then to the Copernican revolution. [Tags: topic_maps steve_pepper ]

6 Comments »

Birte Fallet, Kjersti Haukaas and Asbjørn Risan present a topic map of Donald Duck’s world. It cameou t of a master course at Oslo University, with Steve Pepper as tutor.

They show the surprisingly full Duck family tree and the topic map of the relationships. Quackmore is the father of Donald and Della. [See? We learn stuff every day! They made special relationships for cousin, uncle, etc. [Why not infer this from the tree? Possibly because they decided to exclude known members who do not participate in stories.] Some relationships are symmetric, and some are asymmetric. They have a special association type for “unrequited love.” And some characters switch occupations. In fact, Donald seems to have a different job in juist about every episode: museum guard, factory worker, dog catcher… They attached the occuptations to the stories. They’ve captured a lot of detail. [But not a taxonomy of Entertainers Without Pants]

They found topic maps to provide “associative richness,” flexible, easy to learn and “Quite fun actually.” The map is here

[Tags: topic_maps donald_duck ]

2 Comments »

Three musicians from the Royal Academcy of Music — Antony Pitts, Hannah Riddell, and John Drinkwater — talk about using topic maps to organize music. They begin with a snippet of Bach’s “A Musical Offering,” which always strikes me as extraordinarily modern, as well as of course exquisitely beautiful. [Caution: I’m live-blogging and thus only capturing a little of what’s being said, plus making mistakes, writing poorly, etc.]

Anthony talks about one day in the life of the Academy. He zooms in on more and more detail, eventually showing a messy sketch of a small stretch of time, including the works and musicians being discussed and performed, with “A Musical Offering” at the center. It’s a mess. Now he shows a cleaner version that sorts by scores, sounds, ideas and opinions. But the musical work doesn’t exist in any one of those boxes, he says. The music moves from inspiration to notation to interpretation to reception. There are distinct boundaries between them. Anthony treats those as rows and adds columns for creating, capturing, connecting and communicating.

Ultimately, they show a timeline — RAMline — divided into seven rows: idea, composer, score, performer, sound, audience and history. It is fed from a topic map, allowing multiple visualizations.

Anthony shows the ontology. [Pardon me if I don’t try to capture it :)]

Hannah teaches a course on assessing the way music is documented. Students create their own RAMlines, like a CV. “The logic of the topic map has transcended language barriers,” and led them to unexpected conclusions. One student (Laurie) did a map of Bach’s cello suites, tracking versions, arrangements, and publications. Another student has a RAMline of Chopin Scherzo #4, tracking the recordings, etc.

The project is at the end of Phs 1: an internal working model. In phase 3, it goes open access. [Yay!] They hope it will be largest online music knowledge base.

Steve Pepper adds that topic maps started out as a way to capture musical information

7 Comments »

Sam Oh teaches at Sungkyunkwan U in Korea and heads the ISO committee responsible for Topic Maps (among other things). (I had the pleasure and honor of having dinner with him last night.) [Caution: Live-Blogging]

FRBR tries to capture the various levels of abstraction of our works. Group 1 consists of: work, expression, manifestation, and item. “A work is realized through an expression” that is “embodied in” a manifestation and “is exemplified by an item.” E.g., Othello is a work which may be expressed in English or in Korean. A particular edition of a book is a manifestation, while a particular copy is an item.

Group 2 consists of people and corporate bodies responsible for creating Group 1.

Group 3 are the subject entities that “serve as the subjects of intellectual or artistic endeavor” Concept (topical subject heading), object (name for an object), even (name for an event), place (name for a place). Sam says that FRBR adopted these from topic maps.

There are some defined relationships among these three grups: A work is by a person, a manifestation may be produced by a corporate bdy, etc. Ad there are work to work relationships such as successor, supplement, complement, translation, etc.

Currently, everything is focused on the manifestation level. That’s at the center of the map, so to speak. A future direction for library systems: Applying FRBR in services to present search results, to streamline cataloging, and to express new insights into works. FRBR can “naturally” be rendered in topic maps, he says.

Sam talks about mapping MARC (standard bibliographic records) to FRBR. The OCLC has an algorithm for converting these.

He shows some examples of pages and maps. He also notes that FRBR’s terms for talking about these levels of expression aren’t clear to a general public. E.g., most people don’t talk about “manifestations.” He’d like to see better terms, especially as FRBR gets exposed more widely. He also thinks the library community should come to know topic maps better.

[Tags: sam_oh frbr libraries topicmaps topic_maps oclc everything_is_miscellaneous ]

5 Comments »

Google Maps now (well, I just noticed) lets anyone add a place marker that is visible to all other users. Their example is a spot in a SF park where there’s open air dancing.

I’ll be interested in following two questions: 1. How will policy evolve to handle abuse and edge cases? 2. How will the system be hacked?

1. What controls is Google going to have to introduce to keep maps from being polluted with markers such as “Best pizza in town,” “Marcie the Slut lives here” and “[enter your choice of slur]town”?

As of now, Google lists two types of controls. First, some listings are protected, either because they’re hospitals or government buildings, or because the owners of a business have “claimed” the listing; Google does some form of verification before awarding ownership. Second, there’s a “report abuse” button which sends the listing to a moderation process.

I hope that that’s sufficient. But what about edge cases? If grieving parents mark the spot on the road where their child was killed, will Google count that as abuse and remove it? Historical markers? Celebrity homes? Notices of where events will be held? Treasure hunt clues?

2. Related to the first: How will people creatively hack the system, not to bring it down (the bad hacking) but to use it in ways Google didn’t anticipate (the good hacking)? For example, maybe citizens will mark potholes, possibly giving the text a distinctive, findable tag. Or educational walks. Or the rankings of public schools. Or all the places there was a death by gun. Or a link to a Flickr query that aggregates photos from that spot. Or the ten million better ideas that everyone else will have.

It’ll be fun to watch. [Tags: google google_maps everything_is_miscellaneous ]

7 Comments »