Digital Libraries, Denise Troll Chair

Notes provided primarily by Les Wibberely

Matthew Dovey, Oxford University

• Topic: Observations from Experiences with Digital Library Projects in the UK
• comments on use of z39.50 and uk HE higher education digital electronic libraries
• primarily funded by UK equivalent of NSF, JISC
• eLib
• hybrid libraries,
• integrating heterogeneous electronic sources, integrating electronic and traditional resources
• clumps - union catalogs,
• long term preservation
• hybrid libraries
• chose to work with library vendor to develop API, rather than use Z39.50
• existing z39 interface was poor
• needed to integrate library services into their other internet enable services so looking for components to drop into web server
• heterogeneous search engine - Malibu
• most information sources are available as web services, but not z39.50 enabled
• built on stateless agent model
• web screen scraping agents
• z39.50 agents primary library sources
• generic issues
• few z39 sources - mainly just libraries
• overhead just not justified by benefits
• few desktop tools - no browser incorporation
• clumps
• problems
• local IT ignorance
• library system vendor ignorance
• incorrect implementations
• limited implementations
• implementation variations (hence Bath Profile)
• unrealistic expectations - perception that Z solves all problems
• resource discovery network
• based on whois++
• issues with Z39.50 identified
• lots of overlap between digital library and virtual libraries in terms of issues
• digital libraries focus on electronic resources
• virtual libraries focus on traditional resources
• hybrid libraries try to bring the two together

 

Open Archives Initiative -- Ray Denenberg, speaker

• concepts
• metadata set defined
• author, title, abstract, title, subject, etc.
• similar to dublin core set
• model for unique identifiers
• protocols
• Dienst was original protocol identified
• OAI, a profile (subset of Dienst verbs)
• Dienst mapping is to http
• OAI protocol
• OA protocol - subset of Dienst verbs
• can retrieve from a specific database
• no real search concept
• Z39.50 could play a role in the OA model

 

Denise Troll

• How might the ZIG get the OAI group to look at considering Z39.50 protocol
• we might be able to offer up our data model
• this is a harvester, not mirroring
• also concept of a registry, where providers indicate what data sources are available
• very little focus on the applications which leverage the harvested data
• OCLC office of research is developing an application
• OAI: www.oai.org
• open archive meeting renaissance hotel in dc January 23 (see handout); ZIG encouraged to attend
• will release next version of the protocol at that meeting
• also upcoming meetings in europe
• Need to establish communication between ZIG and OAI to avoid overlapping development
• There are some perception and real problems with both groups
• address perception problems
• address technical and interop. problems - strategic decisions need to be made
• PR issues, approachability of  the ZIG

 

Bill Moen - discussion

• what does it mean for z39.50 to participate in things like Digital Library activities?
• Zig needs to define our scope
• DLF perceives that OAI and Z39.50 protocol server different purposes
• Is there some way for z39.50 gateway to expose its metadata to an OAI harvester
• CAn an OAI system submit its metadata to Z39.50
• would like to do some experimentation and open communication
• OAI metadata resides in a database, which cannot be searched by OAI
• could be searchable by z39.50
• could expose OAI data to other servers
• current OA protocol
• not likely that they can continue indefinitely to build on this protocol
• Sebastian: this is not a competing tool to Z39.50
• If concern about overlap, should attend the OAI meetings
• Could adapt our protocol to meet their needs, if we think its in scope
• if what we have is not what we want, do we want to adapt to meet their needs?
• What do we need to do to promote the ZIG and Z39.50?
• e.g., OCLC continues to need Z39.50, but need others to adopt it, as well, but cannot promote it, as one company, as effectively as the group could
• promotion does take some financial resources, only so much can be done for free
• We might be a new organization, perhaps a trade association
• Does this apply to just Z39.50, or the whole family of standards?  Need to define the scope
• For example, an Open Retrieval Group, rather than a Library retrieval group
• Bob:  if Z39.50 doesn't do what they need, they will abandon it
• But there a lot of companies who have invested a lot of money and need to leverage that - need to band together, and promote it
• Issue: z39.50 implies integration, maybe that is not the direction companies are going