Rendered objects tend to be looked at by humans, often one person looking at (or hearing) one rendering of a digital object at a time. Generating results and combining information from multiple objects is done within a human mind. These rendered objects of course have value and that value can be increased by various means including pointing to related information. Note that to do this often means treating the information as data (as for example Google does).
When one deals with information which is normally not rendered a number of different issues must be considered. Such information is instead processed, often combining information from multiple sources. This requires various types of Representation Information, particularly types which can be treated computationally. For example a machine readable description of a digital object, such as DRB [12], can be used to extract selected pieces of information (numbers, text etc.) from that digital object, to be combined with information extracted from other digital objects.
Virtualisation techniques are often used to increase automated use – including data, hardware and software.
One way to increase the usability of a digital object is therefore to add RepInfo which makes the digitally encoded information understandable to a broader set of users, beyond the Designated Community. Note that the Designated Community is special in that the repository has guaranteed to ensure that the digital object can be understood and uses by that community – this defines the minimum amount of RepInfo the repository must have – matching the knowledge base of the Designated Community.
The repository can choose to add as much additional RepInfo so match the knowledge base of any other community – but does not guarantee to continue to do this into the future. This (wider) community will be able to understand and use the information and this value may justify the maintenance of the RepInfo into the future.
The digital objects should also be discoverable in some sensible way – bearing in mind that some information will be publicly available whereas other information will be restricted.
|
Asset base |
|||
| Issue | WP/Project/Tools/Services | Asset | Evidence |
|
Creation of RepInfo to match knowledge base of a community |
SCIDIP-ES tools and services |
Tools and SystemsFrom SCIDIP-ES:
1/ RepInfo Toolkit, 2/ Preservation Strategy Toolkit, 3/ Registry, 4/ Gap Identification service |
CASPAR evidence base |
|
Interoperability Objectives and Approaches |
APARSEN WP25 |
Deliverable [Download not found]: Survey of interoperability objectives and approaches. It contains an extensive collection of initiatives, projects, solutions, scenarios, recommendations.
|
|
|
Automated Reasoning for Interoperability |
APARSEN D25.2 and SCIDIP-ES software | [Download not found]: A modelling approach that enables automatic interoperability reasoning. It is converter and emulator aware. It can show how to achieve interoperability by combining existing software. In brief D25.2 proposes a modelling approach that enables task performability checking, which in turn can reduce the human effort required for periodically checking or monitoring whether a task on an archived digital object or collection is performable, and consequently whether an interoperability objective is achievable. Such services can also assist preservation planning, especially because now converters and emulators can be modelled and exploited by the dependency services.Overall, the methodology for capturing, modeling, managing and exploiting the various interoperability dependencies can be considered as a significant contribution to the VCoE: expertise in designing and realizing novel inference services for task-performability, risk-detection and for computing intelligibility gaps. Furthermore, the implemented system (which is already web accessible) can be used for disseminating the results of this work, as well as for investigating and planning future operational applications of this approach, either in the context of single organizations (e.g. the DANS case), or in the context of the VCoE (e.g. as an advanced semantic registry).Tools and Systems
1/ APARSEN WP25: System Epimenides that proves the feasibility of the approach. The user evaluation was also positive. 2/ CASPAR Gap Manager: Positive experience from CASPAR 3/ SCIDIP-ES Gap Identification Service |
|
|
SCIDIP-ES software and User feedback |
SCIDIP-ES RepInfo Toolkit, Preservation Strategy Toolkit, Data Virtualisation Toolkit, Registry, Gap Identification service
|
CASPAR evidence
|
|
|
Virtualisation techniques |
Models of Virtualizations – Hierarchy of tasks as described in APARSEN D25.2 |
Tools and Systems – SCIDIP-ES Virtualisation toolkits – SHAMAN results |
Experience of application of virtualisation techniques |
|
SHAMAN |
Multivalent software |
||
|
Discovery techniques |
APARSEN WP22 |
Ontology and tools for PI |
|
|
SCIDIP-ES Finding Aid Preservica EUDAT |
Search and browse capability |
||
|
Searching and accessing information across PIs domains and connecting this information across multiple services and infrastructures for e-science communication |
APARSEN WP22 DIGOIDUNA
|
PI Interoperability Framework PI resolvers |
Two services for searching and accessing distributed information have been developed as part of the WP22 research activities. Using a trusted PI as input the services allow to navigate the network of information connected to the identified entity. For example, providing a PI for an author, it is possible to find his publications and accessing to those which are available on trusted repositories. ORCID and ISNI joint statement on interoperation VIAF and ISNI interoperability initiative |
|
ODIN |
ODIN Proof of concepts in two domains: High-Energy Physics and Humanities and Social Science |
Preliminary models on data exchange and workflows |
|
|
How to achieve interoperability without solely relying on standards. |
APARSEN WP25 |
The methodology, the methods and the tools that are described in D25.2. In brief D25.2 proposes a modelling approach that enables task performability checking, which in turn can reduce the human effort required for periodically checking or monitoring whether a task on an archived digital object or collection is performable, and consequently whether an interoperability objective is achievable. Such services can also assist preservation planning, especially because now converters and emulators can be modelled and exploited by the dependency services. |
|
|
Generic comparison functions for detecting what has been changed |
APARSEN WP25 |
Methods and tools for comparing RDF Graphs (which is currently the lingua franca for metadata management). |
|
|
How Information Objects are defined |
APARSEN WP25 |
The theory presented in the coRR paper: Martin Doerr, Yannis Tzitzikas: Information Carriers and Identification of Information Objects: An Ontological Approach. CoRR abs/1201.0385 (2012) |
|
|
Interoperability Objectives and Approaches |
APARSEN WP25 |
Collection of initiatives, projects, solutions, scenarios, recommendations, etc. |
|
|
Data are made available in a structured way enabling complex searches |
PANGEA |
|
Gaps |
| Interoperability. Lack of an interoperability infrastructure, which can ensure a unique point of search and access to information, which is identified by different PIs and distributed across systems and disciplines.Lack of interoperability and coordination between PIs and Linked Open Data initiatives.
Cooperation among the major PI systems on governance, policies and technology is still in its infancy stages and this is especially true in the case of PI systems for different type of entities (e.g. contributors and datasets). Lack of common access methods e.g. interfaces to images and tables, in end user software (data virtualisation) |