Table Of ContentAn Emergent Theory of Digital Library Metadata
CHANDOS
INFORMATIONPROFESSIONALSERIES
SeriesEditor:RuthRikowski
(email:[email protected])
Chandos’ new series of books is aimed at the busy information professional. They
havebeenspeciallycommissionedtoprovidethereaderwithanauthoritativeviewof
current thinking. They are designed to provide easy-to-read and (most importantly)
practical coverage of topics that are of interest to librarians and other information
professionals.If you wouldlikea full listing ofcurrent and forthcoming titles, please
visitwww.chandospublishing.com.
Newauthors:wearealwayspleasedtoreceiveideasfornewtitles;ifyouwouldlike
towriteabookforChandos,[email protected]
ortelephone+44(0)1865843000.
An Emergent Theory
of Digital Library
Metadata
Enrich then Filter
Getaneh Alemu
and
Brett Stevens
AMSTERDAM(cid:129)BOSTON(cid:129)HEIDELBERG(cid:129)LONDON
NEWYORK(cid:129)OXFORD(cid:129)PARIS(cid:129)SANDIEGO
SANFRANCISCO(cid:129)SINGAPORE(cid:129)SYDNEY(cid:129)TOKYO
ChandosPublishingisanimprintofElsevier
ChandosPublishingisanimprintofElsevier
225WymanStreet,Waltham,MA02451,USA
LangfordLane,Kidlington,OX51GB,UK
Copyright©2015G.AlemuandB.Stevens.PublishedbyElsevierLtd.Allrightsreserved.
Nopartofthispublicationmaybereproducedortransmittedinanyformorbyanymeans,
electronicormechanical,includingphotocopying,recording,oranyinformationstorageand
retrievalsystem,withoutpermissioninwritingfromthepublisher.Detailsonhowtoseek
permission,furtherinformationaboutthePublisher’spermissionspoliciesandourarrangements
withorganizationssuchastheCopyrightClearanceCenterandtheCopyrightLicensingAgency,
canbefoundatourwebsite:www.elsevier.com/permissions.
Thisbookandtheindividualcontributionscontainedinitareprotectedundercopyrightbythe
Publisher(otherthanasmaybenotedherein).
Notices
Knowledgeandbestpracticeinthisfieldareconstantlychanging.Asnewresearchandexperience
broadenourunderstanding,changesinresearchmethods,professionalpractices,ormedical
treatmentmaybecomenecessary.
Practitionersandresearchersmustalwaysrelyontheirownexperienceandknowledgein
evaluatingandusinganyinformation,methods,compounds,orexperimentsdescribedherein.
Inusingsuchinformationormethodstheyshouldbemindfuloftheirownsafetyandthesafety
ofothers,includingpartiesforwhomtheyhaveaprofessionalresponsibility.
Tothefullestextentofthelaw,neitherthePublishernortheauthors,contributors,oreditors,
assumeanyliabilityforanyinjuryand/ordamagetopersonsorpropertyasamatterofproducts
liability,negligenceorotherwise,orfromanyuseoroperationofanymethods,products,
instructions,orideascontainedinthematerialherein.
ISBN:978-0-08-100385-5
BritishLibraryCataloguing-in-PublicationData
AcataloguerecordforthisbookisavailablefromtheBritishLibrary.
LibraryofCongressControlNumber:2015939551
ForinformationonallChandosPublishing
visitourwebsiteathttp://store.elsevier.com/
Authors biography
Dr Getaneh Alemu is an information professional and researcher who is currently
working as a Cataloguing and Metadata Librarian at Southampton Solent
University, United Kingdom. He has worked and studied in higher education for
more than 15 years in Ethiopia, Belgium, Norway, Estonia and the United
Kingdom. He worked as a lecturer and Head University Librarian in Mekelle
University, Ethiopia. He also worked as a research assistant on a digital preserva-
tion project at the University of Portsmouth. Getaneh’s research focus includes
Metadata,DigitalLibraries,OpenAccess,LinkedDataandWeb2.0technologies.
Dr Brett Stevens is a Principal Lecturer and Director of Postgraduate Programmes
for the School of Creative Technologies, University of Portsmouth, United
Kingdom. After joining Portsmouth in 2001, teaching multimedia production, vir-
tual reality and research methods at Masters level, Brett has since become Faculty
Research Degrees Coordinator for the Faculty of Creative and Cultural Industries.
His research focuses on user interaction, with a focus on Augmented and Virtual
Reality, Computer Games and Computer Animation. He is a Member of the British
ComputingSocietyandFellowoftheHigherEducationAcademy.
Re-thinking library metadata
The discipline of library and information science has developed to play a pivotal
role in providing conceptual and technical solutions to library standards agencies,
libraries and library system developers. However, the availability of complete,
timely, accurate and quality information sources, along with the emergence of new
technologies, has changed users’ expectations. This, in turn has prompted existing
metadata principles, approaches, systems and tools to be called into question. This
is partly due to library standards that are underpinned by theories and principles
that were developed in the context of physical libraries and print resources. These
do not always reflect the heterogeneity and diversity of users as well as the ever
increasing size and variety of digital collections. Hence it is imperative that future
metadataapproachesareunderpinnedbyrelevantconceptualprinciples.
This book is informed by 4 years of in-depth interviews with metadata practi-
tioners, researchers and academics from across continents. It presents and discusses
four emerging metadata principles, namely metadata Enriching, Linking, Openness
andFiltering.Theintegrationoftheseprinciplesresultedintheemergenceofanew
theory of digital library metadata: The Theory of Metadata Enriching and Filtering.
Within the context of current challenges, the theory stipulates that metadata should
be enriched by melding standards-based (a priori) and socially-constructed
(post-hoc) metadata, and that this cannot be optimally utilised unless the resulting
metadatais contextually and semanticallylinked tobothinternal andexternalinfor-
mation sources. Moreover, in order to exploit the full benefits of such linking,
metadata must be made openly accessible, where it can be shared, reused, mixed
and matched, thus reducing metadata duplication. Ultimately, metadata that has
been enriched (by linking to other openly accessible metadata) should be filtered
foreachuser,viaaflexible,contextual,personalisedandreconfigurableinterface.
The theory provides a holistic framework demonstrating the interdependence
betweenexpert-curatedandsocially-constructedmetadata,wherein theformerhelps
to structure the latter, whilst the latter provides diversity to the former. This theory
also suggests a conceptual shift from the current metadata principle of sufficiency
and necessity, which has resulted in metadata simplicity, to the new principle of
metadata enriching, where information objects are described using a multiplicity
of users’ perspectives (interpretations). Central to this is the consideration of users
as pro-active metadata creators, rather than mere consumers. Librarians adopt
the role of creators of a priori metadata and experts at providing structure, granu-
larity and interoperability to the post-hoc, user-created, metadata. The theory
elegantly delineates metadata functions into two: enriching (metadata content) and
filtering (interface). By providing underlying principles, this should enable
xii Re-thinkinglibrarymetadata
standards-agencies,librariansandsystemsdeveloperstobetteraddress thechanging
needs of users aswell as toadapt torecenttechnological advances.
The emergent theory of digital library metadata, although buttressed by two
seemingly simple concepts, is nonetheless a first rigorous attempt in library and
information science (LIS) research to integrate the concepts of enriching, linking,
openness and filtering into principles and subsequently into a holistic digital library
metadata theory. By making the case for mixed metadata (standards-based and
socially-constructed metadata), the theory brings into focus the importance of
re-conceptualising current metadata principles. Hence suggesting a shift from an
objectivistic ontology and deterministic metadata approaches that chiefly focus on
metadata simplicity to a social constructivist, interpretive ontology and
non-deterministiccontinuousandevolvingprocessofmetadataenriching.
Keywords: Libraries, metadata, metadata enriching, metadata linking, linked
data, metadata openness, metadata filtering, cataloguing, MARC, RDA, a priori
metadata, post-hoc metadata, digital libraries, Web 1.0, Web 2.0, Semantic Web,
RDF,OPAC,socially-constructedmetadata,standards-basedmetadata.
1
Introduction
The main function of library catalogues was originally limited to conducting an
inventoryofthelibrary’sholdings.However,widespreadusageoftheprintingpress
as well as the progressive industrialisationof institutions,bothof which contributed
to the growth of library collections, forced libraries to change (Wright, 2007). They
then not only produced listings of their collections for their own use but also pro-
vided the same to their patrons so that the latter could also determine what book(s),
onagivensubjectandbywhichparticularauthor(s)wereavailableontheshelves.
However, the current volume of intellectual works (information objects) avail-
able is unprecedented. Including ancient civilisations, for example Egyptian,
Babylonian, Assyrian, Greek, Roman, Chinese, Indian, Mayan and Aztec (see
Wright, 2007), contemporary human endeavour and the relative democratisation of
information creation, empowered by the World Wide Web, has resulted in an ever
increasing need for information management. This increase in size and diversity of
information resulted in a phenomenon often referred to as information overload but
also known as info glut, data smog or information tsunami (Blair, 2010; Morville,
2005;Toffler,1970,1980;Weinberger,2007,2012;Wright,2007).
To alleviate these and related challenges, the discipline of library and informa-
tion science has developed to play a pivotal role in providing conceptual and tech-
nical solutions (Svenonius, 2000). The discipline brings the multi-faceted functions
pertaining to the identification, selection, storage, retrieval, evaluation and utilisa-
tion of information under the field of information organisation (Blair, 2010; IFLA,
2009; Lagoze, 2010; Svenonius, 2000). However, current practice is rooted in a
long history of incremental developments and it is important to see the current
theorydevelopmentinthiscontext.
OneofthepioneersofmoderncataloguingwasSirAnthonyPanizziwhoiscred-
ited with publishing the 91 ‘Rules for the Compilation of the Catalogue’ in 1841,
whilst he was at the British Museum’s library. Panizzi’s goal was to devise a sys-
tem that could definitely solve the problem of how to give access to the right book,
including itsvarious editions, if any, as well as others on a related topic to the right
user, at the right time. Panizzi ‘felt the old catalogue was too limited, linear and
one-dimensional,proposinginsteadanew,intricate setofrulesforidentifyingaddi-
tional “meta” information such as editions, publishers, dates and places of publica-
tion’ (Wright, 2007). Panizzi’s work focused on devising multiple access or entry
points (such as author, title and subject) for identifying, distinguishing, relating and
accessing works and their granular forms of editions, translations and formats. By
and large, Panizzi is considered a pioneer of the card catalogue and his contribu-
tions to library cataloguing ‘would go down as a landmark in the history of library
science’(Wright,2007).
AnEmergentTheoryofDigitalLibraryMetadata.
©2015G.AlemuandB.Stevens.PublishedbyElsevierLtd.Allrightsreserved.
2 AnEmergentTheoryofDigitalLibraryMetadata
Following Panizzi’s ideas, in the United States, the simultaneous efforts of
Charles Cutter, who published ‘Rules for a Printed Dictionary Catalogue’, and
Melville Dewey, for his landmark development of the Dewey Decimal
Classification scheme in 1876, are given particular prominence (Denton, 2007;
Weinberger, 2007; Wright, 2007). However, whilst Cutter focused on cataloguing,
Dewey put emphasis on classifying knowledge into 10 major divisions, each of
which was subsequently subdivided into 10 parts and so on. Both Cutter and
Dewey strived to improve the discoverability of books on library shelves and in
making the efforts of library patrons easier by collocating similar books together
(Coyle, 2010; Wright, 2007). The Dewey Decimal Classification scheme has subse-
quently become extremely successful, having been widely adopted throughout the
world (Weinberger, 2007; Wright, 2007). However, it is also important to note that
an alternative, Library of Congress Classification scheme, developed by Herbert
Putnam in 1897, is also used by several libraries across the world including the
LibraryofCongressitself(Denton,2007;Wright,2007).
Moving on to Europe, Paul Otlet, after having reviewed the efforts of Melville
Dewey’s DDC and Panizzi’s cataloguing scheme, came to the conclusion that the
catalogues and classification systems led the patron ‘as far as the individual book’
but not to the relationship of its contents to that of others. He devised a system
called the ‘re´seau’ (cid:1) a tool for creating semantic links between documents and
keeping track of the annotations made by readers. These eventually formed new
trails of documents, all of them semantically interconnected (Wright, 2007). Day
(2001) and Wright (2007) agree that, as a pioneer of documentation and informa-
tionscience,Otletdeservescreditasaprecursorofthewebforhisvision ofseman-
tic links and associations between documents in 1934, well before Vannevar Bush
(1945)wrotehislandmarkarticle‘AsWeMayThink’.
The title of Otlet’s book, ‘Traite´ de documentation’ is indicative of his vision of
a ‘book on the book’, which is closely related to the current conception of the term
‘metadata’. With his quest to build what would be now considered a Google-like
indexing system, Otlet can truly be considered one of the precursors of Sir Tim
Berners-Lee’s World Wide Web, along with Vannevar Bush and Ted Nelson.
Sadly, he mostly remains an obscure and forgotten figure (Wright, 2007, 2008).
However, in what seems to be an acknowledgement of Otlet’s contribution in envi-
sioningasearchableindexofcardsandtohelpensurethepreservationofhisworks,
Google Inc. has embarked on a partnership project with the Museum in Mons,
Belgium, where it is housing the ‘library-style card catalogue with millions of
entries,ananalogue-eraequivalentofasearchengine’(Pfanner,2012).
Otlet’s focus on connecting readers with the information they need was taken up
by the Indian librarian, S. R. Ranganathan, with his theory of faceted classification
(i.e. categorising/browsing using five major facets such as personality, matter,
energy, space and time), aiming to provide various access points (routes) to the
information object users need. However, he is mainly considered an important
figure in library science for his work, ‘The Five Laws of Library Science’ (Denton,
2007; Wright, 2007). It is worth noting that Ranganathan was one of the first to
point out that, whilst the types, formats and media of information sources continue
Introduction 3
to change, along with the needs and expectations of users, the main ethos that are
embodied in the library’s mandate remains identical, namely providing free access
to information sources and services whilst rendering these services to the right
patron at the right time. A library’s principal goals are thus aptly epitomised in
‘The Five Laws of Library Science’ (in the 1930s) (cid:1) these are: books are for use,
every reader his book, every book its reader, save the time of the reader and the
libraryisagrowingorganism(Denton,2007).
These pioneers had moved library science a long way from listing books but
Seymour Lubetzky (1953) realised that ‘as [library] holdings increased and the pro-
ductionofbooksrose,newfunctionswereimposedandtheoldimprovisedmethods
became inadequate’. Thus, Lubetzky advocated the tenet of constructing library
cataloguing standards on strong theoretically coherent, foundational principles
rather than upon case-based rules. He argued that the former, aimed at functional-
ism rather than formalism, better addresses the issue of providing access to ever
increasing collections in libraries. It would also make ‘the work of cataloguers
more interesting and satisfying, because it would be rational in application and pur-
poseful in function’ (Lubetzky, 1953). His works laid the foundations for what was
later referred to as the ‘1961 Paris Principles of Cataloguing’, thus ushering librar-
ies into a new era of regional and international consortia on cataloguing principles
andtechniques.
Drawing upon the works of Panizzi, Otlet, Cutter, Dewey, Ranganathan and
Lubetzky, regional and international consortia embarked on projects aimed at insti-
tuting even more rigorous cataloguing principles and rules, which subsequently
resulted in such standards publications as the Paris Principles, 1961; the Anglo-
American Cataloguing Rules (AACR), 1967; MAchine-Readable Cataloguing
(MARC), in the late 1960s; International Standard Bibliographic Description
(ISBD) for Monographic Publications, 1971; Functional Requirements for
Bibliographic Records (FRBR), 1996; and Resource Description and Access
(RDA), 2010 (Denton, 2007). More often than not, these models tend to be evolu-
tionary, incremental changes, latter efforts being built upon earlier contributions.
Forinstance,the FRBR model buildsuponthe Paris Principlesand ISBD aswell as
other, more recent, international efforts and discussions held during several
International Federation of Library Associations (IFLA) conferences and consulta-
tions (IFLA, 2009). The same is true for the RDA standard, which draws from sev-
eral years of experience of AACR, its predecessor (Dunsire, 2009). As noted by
Dunsire (2009), standards such as RDA, FRBR and MARC are interdependent.
However, all these focused on the book but, with the growth of the World Wide
Web, there was a need to describe web-based documents and electronic resources
as well. Thus, the term ‘metadata’, referring to ‘data about data’ or more literally
‘beyonddata’,wasadoptedasamoreencompassingterminologythancataloguing.
Metadata principles which currently underpin the creation and utilisation of
metadata functions in libraries thus have had an enduring history (Denton, 2007;
Dunsire, 2009; IFLA, 2009; Lubetzky, 1953; Svenonius, 2000; Wright, 2007).
However, whilst these metadata principles served libraries relatively well for print
collections, with the ever growing volume and diversity of information objects
