LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.5

Help for CODE4LIB Archives


CODE4LIB Archives

CODE4LIB Archives


CODE4LIB@LISTS.CLIR.ORG


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

CODE4LIB Home

CODE4LIB Home

CODE4LIB  April 2010

CODE4LIB April 2010

Subject:

Re: Looking for advice for project to tranform MARC bib data into work records

From:

"Diane I. Hillmann" <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Code for Libraries <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Thu, 1 Apr 2010 13:02:25 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (106 lines)

Kelley:

I'd like to second Jonathan's suggestion about the XC Metadata Toolkit, 
and add a few more reasons.  One of the things that's built into how 
they're operating is the notion that no transformation is final.  In 
other words, if you use the Toolkit and don't think it works for what 
you're doing, you can tweak it to make it work in ways that you like 
better.  The metadata transformation services that they are thinking of 
are not THE solution for everyone, but I would suggest that you look 
more closely at their metadata strategies and methodologies before 
hiring a programmer, or consider having your programmer work with them 
to come up with something that works within their architecture.  This 
way, your solution will also be usable within a framework that makes 
sense across the community, particularly now that we're thinking about 
what linked data might do for us.

Diane

On 4/1/10 12:50 PM, McGrath, Kelley C. wrote:
> Thanks, Jonathan. I had thought about the XC Metadata Toolkit, but I think perhaps our use case is sufficiently non-standard that it might not be easier than starting from scratch. 1) The moving image cataloging community has significant disagreements with RDA's interpretation of the FRBR model and for this project we are using a modified FRBR model anyway; I think Rochester is using a more orthodox model. 2) I think we are trying to squeeze a lot more out of the metadata than most of the other FRBRizing applications I've seen. But it's probably worth checking out. I do think XC's OAI toolkit in particular and possibly the discovery layer could be useful to us when we get further along.
>
> I think we are probably looking at hiring someone to do custom programming, but I feel that I am in a bit over my head knowing how to specify what to ask for, much less to come up with a realistic budget and timeline for a grant. And I guess the reason I was asking about tools was that I was getting the impression that we would have to specify something when advertising for a programmer. I obviously have no particular preferences except for not wanting to end up in a dead end.
>
> Kelley
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Code for Libraries [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jonathan Rochkind
> Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2010 11:47 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Looking for advice for project to tranform MARC bib data into work records
>
> I don't have enough experience with that problem area to be sure of
> what's out there and what would work, but I was pretty impressed with
> the presentation on the XC Metadata Toolkit at the recent Code4Lib
> conference, I think it is designed to do at least some, if not all, of
> your tasks you outline, and seems to be pretty solid. It might be worth
> contacting Jennifer Bowen to see what she has to say about your problem
> case and XC's ability to meet it, or if she has any other tool
> suggestions, she's pretty clever on this stuff. And XC is probably
> interested in getting their software used by folks like you.
>
> Another alternative is simply hiring a programmer to write something
> custom to do exactly what you need; that's what most of us probably end
> up doing, because we don't know about suitable general-purpose metadata
> control software that's still customizable enough to do what we need.
> But I think the XC Metadata Toolkit is definitely _intended_ to fill
> that niche. If you can hire someone with experience with library
> metadata, and you can have people giving them requirements who
> understand what software can and can not actually do (like yourself
> Kelley), this is not TOO much of an unusual project, in just about any
> programming language (I'd do it in ruby, but let's not start THAT thread
> which has thankfully died again. ) ).
>
> Jonathan
>
> McGrath, Kelley C. wrote:
>    
>> I am hoping someone can help me with my current conundrum. I am looking for recommendations for tools and methods for a project I am working on to try to implement some of the Online Audiovisual Catalogers (OLAC) work on FRBR works and moving images (http://www.olacinc.org/drupal/?q=node/27). I am not a programmer or coder, but we are going to have to hire someone to do this and give them some direction. So I am interested in what tools you would recommend for this purpose and why, as well as any other advice anyone can give me.
>>
>> Basically what we want to do is take a large number of MARC bibliographic records for moving images, extract the information that might describe the FRBR Work and parse and normalize it. We then want to use this data to create provisional Work records. I am not so worried about getting the data out of MARC, but about how to work with the data once it's out. I have listed the main steps we anticipate needing in broad outlines below.
>>
>> 1.      Parsing and Normalizing Data
>>
>> There are several types of situations from easiest to harder with examples:
>>
>> a.       Data that is already in machine-comprehensible form:
>>
>> Coded language data, e.g., an 041 $h of fre means the movie was originally in French
>>
>> A 700 field with a $4 of drt means that the name in that in that 700 is (hopefully) the authorized form of the name of the director of the movie
>>
>> A DateType fixed field of p means that the lower of Date1 and Date2 is the original date of the movie (technically this should always be Date2, but some libraries reverse the order to support sorting by original date in their OPACs)
>>
>> b.      Data that can be extracted using keywords in textual fields
>>
>> We can often extract an original date from a note field by identifying the combination of a year (18xx, 19xx, or 200x) and a keyword that signifies that it is an original production date note, such as "originally," "release," "broadcast," or "produced."
>>      
>    
>> c.       Data that requires matching between information in more than one field
>>
>> In order to identify the authorized form of the name of a person performing a particular function, in many cases we have to try to match the authorized form of the name to a transcribed statement including both the function and the name. Note that functions can be transcribed in many forms (directed by, director, direction) and languages (Regie, kantoku). Also the transcribed name may vary from the authorized name ("Andrei Tarkovsky" vs. "Tarkovskii, Andrei Arsenevich"). Neither of these is a practical problem to solve completely, but we would like to be able to make inferences as follows (probably starting from the 7xx fields and trying to find a matching transcribed statement).
>>
>> 245$c includes "directed by Steven Spielberg"
>> + 700 Spielberg, Steven, $d 1946-
>> = n  79148103 (Spielberg, Steven, $d 1946-) is the director
>>
>> 2.      Ranking Information Sources Within Records
>>
>> We have multiple possible methods for extracting most types of data. We plan to rank these data sources in terms of their probable accuracy. Some of the ranking we can predict up front and probably skip step 1 for the non-preferred data sources. Some data sources we can probably rank based on analysis of preliminary results. Some sources probably can't be ranked and we would want to know when a record presents conflicting data (e.g., one original date in a note and a different one in a fixed field)
>>
>> 3.      Clustering Records for the Same Work
>>
>> In our data pool, we will have cases where multiple bibliographic records represent the same work. We need to cluster the ones that represent a given work based on data extracted in the above steps. Information such as title, original date, director, or production company is probably useful for this purpose.
>>
>> 4.      Creating Provisional Work Records by Identifying the Most Likely Value for Each Data Element from the Work Cluster
>>
>> Once we have clustered the records for the works, we want to create a single composite work record from the data in the clustered records. We will need some algorithm, possibly as simple as a majority vote or perhaps a majority vote per manifestation rather than per record, to determine the probable best value for each field in our preliminary work record.
>>
>> Thanks in advance for any advice on tools or general thoughts on this. Also, are there any particular skills or qualities we should be looking for in a programmer?
>>
>> Kelley McGrath
>> [log in to unmask]
>>
>>
>>      
>    

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

November 2024
October 2024
September 2024
August 2024
July 2024
June 2024
May 2024
April 2024
March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTS.CLIR.ORG

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager