 |
 |
Sorry, to be a little more constructive: If you can describe the difference between Europeana's functionality now and your vision for your CKAN implementation, that would be helpful for providing advice. On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 10:36 AM, Ethan Gruber <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Are these GLAMs also putting cultural heritage data into Europeana? You > can already filter by country (that holds the work) in Europeana.There are > 6 million objects from the Netherlands. Your energy might be better spent > either harvesting Dutch material back out of Europeana into a separate > Netherland-only interface or by focusing on integrating smaller > institutions into Europeana via OAI-PMH. > > In fact, your own material are in Europeana: > http://www.europeana.eu/portal/search?f%5BCOUNTRY%5D%5B%5D=netherlands&f%5BTYPE%5D%5B%5D=SOUND&q= > > Ethan > > On Tue, Jul 5, 2016 at 12:19 PM, Johan Oomen <[log in to unmask]> > wrote: > >> Good afternoon, >> >> In the Netherlands, we’re working on overhauling our current (OAI-PMH) >> aggregation infrastructure towards a more distributed model. The aim is to >> create a comprehensive collection of digitised cultural heritage objects >> held by GLAMs across the country. A major component of the new >> infrastructure is a register with collections. We are using CKAN as the >> data management system for these collections. >> >> We are currently installing and configuring CKAN, and use DCAT for >> describing datasets. We are interested in seeing other examples of >> registries that describes digital heritage collections using the CKAN >> software. One of the challenges we encounter is describing multi level >> datasets like collection and sub-collections in the context of DCAT. An >> example is a data provider in the Netherlands that provides an aggregated >> oral history dataset for target audience ‘oral history’. We registered this >> aggregated dataset, but we also want to register individual collections for >> participating organisations. Therefore, the aggregated dataset is divided >> into parts using xpath, xslt, etc.. Now we want to explicitly mark the >> dataset parts as being a sub-dataset and vice versa. >> >> Question to this community, do you have implementations that use a CKAN >> based registry for digital heritage collections, have you also dealt with >> this issue to describe sub-collections in DCAT? How did you manage this? >> >> Your help is much appreciated, >> >> Best wishes, >> >> Johan Oomen >> Netherlands Institute for Sound and Vision >> @johanoomen > > >