You are currently browsing the Bricolage weblog archives for May, 2012.

Archive for May, 2012

Bricolage: demonstrators

Friday, May 25th, 2012

At the Advisory Group meeting on 20 April, we discussed potential scope and focus of the two demonstrators that the project will develop. For the Geology Museum, we may want to focus on a demonstrator that links to promoting their work in schools, which could include a mapping feature. The Penguin Archive may want to consider a timeline demonstrator linked to a specific area of the Archive.

We looked at some examples to help refine thinking on demonstrators:

Examples of the use of a timeline:

Example of a geographical view:

The Advisory Group will finalise demonstrators to be developed at its meeting in May; the key will be in demonstrating how the use of Linked Data can enhance the collections, which may in turn encourage sustainability of the tools and processes used.

Progress against workplan

Friday, May 25th, 2012

The Bricolage Advisory Group reviewed progress against the project workplan at its second meeting on 20 April 2012. We agreed to bring forward by a month each the two remaining AG meetings – to May and July – to ensure continuing review and steer towards the end of the project in August.

The Linked Data: Hosting work package has started with options such as Talis and data.bris being considered. Timing of the data.bris project may preclude its use, although it may not be the best place to host data from Bricolage anyway. It could, however, be used to create URIs and expose data in an external view. Options to be considered more fully at the meeting in May.

The Linked Data : Metadata review/export work package is moving at a different pace with the Penguin Archive and the Geology Museum (see separate blog posts on export work). In Earth Sciences, student effort is being used to move data from spreadsheet format into an online (Drupal) database. Some of the issues arising are in formats used, including free text, and the need to restrict terminology. There is a huge amount of currently unstructured data. Review and export piloting will carry on for another 2-3 weeks. For the Penguin Archive, wok has focused on trying to add authority terms but this has proved extremely labour-intensive, more so than anticipated. Good authority data is needed for good Linked Data, and this needs to be taken into account when initially cataloguing collections. Legacy data without authority data continue to pose problems.

The entity extraction process poses the question ‘can we identify things in textual descriptions, linking unlinked data? Some online services can analyse text, eg DBPedia Spotlight entity detection and disambiguation services for constructing bespoke Named Entity Recognition solutions. The Women’s Library at London Met deals effectively with disambiguation of names. We are interested in parsing text through the process to see how useful and accurate it can be. Entity extraction is at the experimental end of our work, but Linked Data to an authority source and processes around this are of interest.

Export implementation should be complete by end of May.

Identifiers and Linking work package: Geology have thus far been creating internal links within their data. Work to link this data to other datasets has not yet started. Work on the Penguin Archive to date has highlighted a problem around the stability of URIs; sustainability is an issue for the future. For example, a person identified in the Penguin Archive data could have a unique ID in CALM but that identifier could easily break if CALM’s internal ID scheme is changed by the vendor. Alternative ID schemes that rely on the person’s name or their biographical dates also pose similar problems if, say, the person changes their name or their commonly accepted biographical dates change. We need persistent IDs (eg DOIs) in combination with a resolver service to map from persistent IDs to appropriate internal current IDs (eg CALM IDs).

On microdata, for Geology we’re looking to embed data coming out of the catalogue in the public site so that big search engines can find structured data. We’ll be looking at metadata as RDFa within the HTML of the public site.

Sustainability of the tools and workflow developed during the project is important. The key is in developing a set of processes and tools that are easy to use in terms of the export process and publication of Linked Data, so that archivists might routinely use them. Questions arise about what is most useful for the long-term, what is transferable.

The demonstrator workpackages will begin at the end of May; evaluation and dissemination work packages will be discussed at the May Advisory Group meeting.

Penguin Archive workflow design

Thursday, May 17th, 2012

One of our aims is to produce a workflow for publishing Linked Open Data that is simple for our collection curators to engage with and continue to use post-project. Whilst we can produce one-off Linked Data snapshots of their archives during the project, a real measure of success would be to see those processes embedded into the standard work of the collection maintainers. From their point-of-view the steps for re-publishing the various collections as Linked Data should be as straightforward as possible. Just uploading a raw data file, for example. We want to avoid (as much as possible) introducing requirements that involve too much manual intervention.

So let’s consider one possible workflow for the Penguin Archive in this post. (This workflow is based around the concept of local Linked Data publishing platform, though we are also considering remote third-party options.)

  • The collection is held in an instance of Axiell CALM. Using its desktop client it is a relatively straightforward process for an archivist to export collection data to EAD XML format.
  • The resulting files can be uploaded to our Linked Data Publishing Service (LDPS) via a browser-based tool. This tool will provide a simple management interface to govern the workflow, the first part of which is transformation into RDF. Building on work done in the LOCAH project we use XSLT to produce RDF from the EAD XML.
  • Using the LDPS again, the RDF is loaded into a triple store. Our intention here is to use Fuseki for this task. Using its support for SPARQL over HTTP the LDPS will manage each collection as a separate Named Graph. Fuseki provides a SPARQL endpoint to these Graphs and also serves the Default Graph as their union.
  • In order to serve the Linked Data we intend to use Elda. This is an implementation of the Linked Data API and will answer Linked Data requests by translating them to backend SPARQL queries.

Here is a graphical overview of this architecture:

In terms of automation it doesn’t look to bad. The archivist needs to manage the CALM exports and XML file uploads to the LDPS. Then they (or someone else) would use the LDPS to manage the RDF transforms and triple store contents. The interface to these processes should hopefully be reasonably straightforward (upload, transform, publish to triple store). Elda, once configured, shouldn’t need touching.

So what is missing? Well, linking to other data sets for a start. In this area we’ll need the input of subject experts. When making links from our data sets to others we’ll need a human to confirm the links any automation (text parsing via DBpedia Spotlight?) has proposed. The design of this type of workflow needs to be carefully considered, with the results being cached for future use wherever possible. The subject for a future post.

People and their URIs

Tuesday, May 15th, 2012

Over on the Linking Lives blog Pete Johnston has published an interesting discussion of some of the problems surrounding the generation of URIs from EAD data, especially with regards to people. These considerations are proving to be particularly pertinent to our work with the Penguin collection data.