Question of the Day: Alt tags and EXIF data (images)

Q: Do alt tags for images really matter? Does EXIF data really matter? What is EXIF data?

A: A group of us on facebook had an interesting discussion about EXIF data.

yes, alt tags are important, especially for reading machines for visually impaired and other technology that translates websites (esp. for 508 compliance), but I agree that spending alot of time fixing them is probably not worth it for what you do.
I think the jury is still out on blogger being a bad thing. When google first bought blogger, ... See Moreindividual posts were skewing higher than the actual websites... google looks after its own, so using blogger is probably a good thing in the long run.
Plus, it is becoming more and more about a collective approach, being everywhere, but not concentrating results anywhere. I'd say if all of your content was on your own domain that would be much worse in the long run. Wes, there is no need to worry with SEO (don't throw things at me, my SEO friends) because google changes its algorithms regularly.... and google is not the only browser is se land. Having good content that is relevant, have established presences on the web both in a namesake and social media (one of google's ranking algorithms at one point WAS length of domain presence), and making a reasonable use of metadata (exif, description, admin/rights, etc.) is probably the most important. We are moving towards RDF/semantic and tailored results, so one day ranking will be completely personalized and this notion of ranking as we know it will no longer exist. Of course, then the metadata will become even more important... but the tools have to get better first. Just my thoughts... ;-P

Mobile data and security [infographic]

Electronic Health Records - metadata and your health [infographic]

Interesting overview of health records and metadata

Thoughts on CATALOGING, RDA, and metadata in netflix

 I have so many thoughts on this nexflix article but they can all be summed as humans and machines working together to organize, describe and provide relevance (the best of both worlds!) : semantic cataloging. Of course, libraries have been organizing, categorizing, and describing materials from the beginning, but RDA is a big step forward. With the end of print card catalogs and record limits (for the most part), the amount of data within a library catalog record can be much more expansive. Other library databases like repositories and digital libraries, generally have not faced record limits nor have they been tied to MARC (which has its own pros/cons). Of course, quantity doesn't always equal quality, either, but under RDA, we can provide as much description as we would like.

Another aspect of RDA is breaking up more data into smaller bits. Information that might have only appeared in a free text note field or was omitted from a library catalog record, may now be included in -- in some cases, as part of a controlled vocabulary, such as relator codes. These CODES provide information about the relationship of a particular person to a variety of things and can be used to build different kinds of linking, relevance, and all sorts of things! Libraries could create mechanisms so that users and others can more easily use the data to dynamically build lists or collections that are relevant to them (there's the semantic aspect!)  Of course, in order to use the data to make new things, it has to be open. 

Netflix has had a similar evolution in metadata. Thinking to what our nexgen library catalog systems could be like, let's look at what Netflix has done (and what a few folks have done with their data, which could only happen with at least, some of the data being open). 

Tagging/Data
It starts with people creating data and machine data collection:

"They [workers] capture dozens of different movie attributes. They even rate the moral status of characters. When these tags are combined with millions of users viewing habits, they become Netflix's competitive advantage. "


Much like traditional cataloging work, tagging is only as good as the tagger. The advantage that libraries have had is that the staff who do this sort of work (cataloging) most likely have some sort of training or relevant education.

In most popular social media (facebook, twitter, etc.) and image gallery sites (flickr, youtube, etc.) sub-tags if any, are limited: geographic (GIS , frequently from phone or camera gps coordinates in the exif metadata), subjects (topics as input by the uploader or tagger), names (user who uploaded or who tags other users in item), dates (item uploaded), access (public/private/select user group), system file information (file format, name, etc.)  and rights (copyright, permissions, etc.) are among the most common. For some image sites, exif data will automatically be loaded in, most frequently date, type of camera, file information and general image specs (size, resolution, etc.) ; other information such as rights (copyright)  is less likely to be picked up.  Facebook's support of metadata is marginal* (EXIF metadata is stripped out) and while Flickr does support the most metadata for images*, it relies primarily on the user to fill out the forms correctly to describe and assign the metadata. (See photometadata.org for more information about EXIF and social media).

In terms of search, crowdsourced metadata can be a challenge. It is only as good (and complete!) as the user who creates it. If you have ever searched for hashtags in twitter, or tags in Flickr, you will see they are used every way imaginable. Hashtags are used as a statement #fail #thisisstupid #greatread,  duplicated #ala (multiple things with the same keyword),  or misspelled #teh (the), with little in the way of quality control placed on them.

Structure
However, there is some structure in place, which facilitates searching by hashtag/tag vs. date.

While libraries have had better systems in that the metadata was created by experts and experienced staff, much of the data in a traditional MARC record is unstructured. Funny, no? We think of MARC as being so structured and while it is in terms of field order and use and the fixed field (character placement is essential there), it is not so structured within some fields, like the 5XX fields or even within the 245 (title/statement of responsibility) field. As long as the indicators are correct and the subfields are input correctly, the content within that field is really a type of free text. albeit with some rules for inputting. For example, while the 245 was and remains under RDA as a transcription field (key it as you see it), there are still "shortcuts" (i.e., ways to minimize data recorded) under RDA (See: a nice overview of changes between AAC2 and RDA). So, while it's transcription, it's not exactly ALWAYS word for word (albeit more so with RDA).

The third major component is that the data is open, or at least partially open.With siloed data, this experiment would have not been possible. Having siloed data decreases its ability to be used by others, as well.



So, how was Netflix able to make this successful from a metadata standpoint?

• a defined (controlled) vocabulary (subject headings, authorities): " The same adjectives appeared over and over. Countries of origin also showed up, as did a larger-than-expected number of noun descriptions like Westerns and Slasher..."  

• a structure (for catalogers, a similarity to how subject headings are formatted in a traditional library catalog), in netflix:  

• Region, Awards named first (at least for Oscars)
• Adjectives (Keywords, subject headings)
• Dates and places named last (akin to a geographic subdivision)

"If a movie was both romantic and Oscar-winning, Oscar-winning always went to the left: Oscar-winning Romantic Dramas. Time periods always went at the end of the genre: Oscar-winning Romantic Dramas from the 1950s....
In fact, there was a hierarchy for each category of descriptor. Generally speaking, a genre would be formed out of a subset of these components:

Region + Adjectives + Noun Genre + Based On... + Set In... + From the... + About... + For Age X to Y"

 Akin to traditional subject headings:
6510 Sardinia (Italy) $v maps $v Early works to 1800  
650 0  $a Beach erosion $z Florida $z Pensacola Beach $x History $y 20th century $v Bibliography.

•  data bits that can be repackaged: "little "packets of energy" that compose each movie.... "microtag."" (the smaller the data bits, the more they can be repackaged in different ways) 

 "Netflix's engineers took the microtags and created a syntax for the genres..... "


Thinking back to nexgen systems: RDA is providing a fairly good foundation to go beyond the traditional catalog. When done right (more vs. less, quality AND quantity), cataloging will net structured data bits that can be repackaged and relationship information that can build provide links between previously unrelated items (at least within the catalog); provided the data is open to be used and mechanisms are built so that users can create their own catalog experience. In that world, cataloging truly becomes semantic.
 


References:
Open Bibliographic Data, http://opendefinition.org/bibliographic/
Photometadata.org photometadata.org
AACR2 compared to RDA, field by field: http://www.rda-jsc.org/docs/5sec7rev.pdf  
How netflix reverse engineered hollywood: http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2014/01/how-netflix-reverse-engineered-hollywood/282679/
 

*Disclaimer: I have no idea what the backend systems of sites do with metadata; my thoughts are based upon the user experience. 

GLAMLOD: Linked data, semantic web group meetup

Some of you may remember this group was formed last year after GLA. Please excuse crossposting: Interested in linked data? Interested in the semantic web? Not even sure what the heck that is or how it applies to libraries, archives, or museums? GLAMLOD: Georgia Libraries, Archives & Museums Linked Open Data (http://www.facebook.com/glamlod/) is hosting a meetup in atlanta in November. Please join our discussion group at google groups or like us on facebook for news and updates. If you're interested in the meetup, please contact a member of the group. Feel free to share this with colleagues who might be interested. Here is the proposed plan. What: This is a GLAMLOD meet-up with presentations and information sharing on tools, training, demos, potential uses, or emerging practices regarding linked data. When: (TBD) Sometime the week of November 11th 2013. 6:30pm - 9:00pm Where: Atlanta GA (Manuel's Tavern) Who: GLAMLOD members and guests How: In person (and we can explore using Skype for remote attendance) Please contact Laura Akerman (liblna@emory.edu), Robin Fay (georgiawebgurl@gmail.com ), or Doug Goans (doug.goans@library.gatech.edu): * If you are interested in attending and especially if you would like to attend virtually. * If you would like to give short presentations or information sharing about linked data. (We are looking for 2-minute lightning talks to about 15 minutes max for each presentation.) * If you have other suggestions for programming.

Linked data presentations

Reading list: linked data & ex-libris

1. Linked data and Ex Libris products – introduction - Lukas Koster, University of Amsterdam, Netherlands
2. Publishing Aleph data as linked open data - Silke Schomburg, HBZ, Germany
3. Linked open dedup vectors – An experiment with RDFa in Primo - Corey Harper, New York University, USA
4. Exploiting DBPedia for use in Primo - Ulrike Krabo, OBVSG, Austria
5. Linking library and theatre data - Lukas Koster,University of Amsterdam, Netherlands
6. Linked data and Ex Libris products – summary - Lukas Koster, University of Amsterdam, Netherlands
7. Ex Libris – linked data outlook - Axel Kaschte, Ex Libris

LInked data, big data presentations archives

OCLC/Lyrasis discussion/presentation that Peter Murray and I facilitated:

Shared Data:

    

Shared Data & Big Data for Libraries from robin fay

Archive: http://tinyurl.com/d89qzmf

Linked Data:

Linked data for Libraries from robin f

Archive:      http://tinyurl.com/cob9uur

Linked data/ GIS project

I thought some of you might be interested in this project:
http://blog.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/2013/04/launching-a-new-linked-data-service/

The database:
http://beta.data.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/datasets/os-linked-data

one of the examples:
http://beta.data.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/doc/7000000000038413

Linked data & Semantic Web Intro

Intro to linked data (presentation on linked data for a library conference) This was for a conference last fall, but I forgot to publish it here, too! we'll talk about some of these concepts on Friday in the Intro to the Semantic Web session.

Georgia (regional) linked data discussion group

I can't remember if I posted this here before, but if you are interested, this discussion group about linked data was started by Laura @ Emory, Doug G @ Ga Tech and a little help from me. 

Please feel free to join us - (and it does not matter what kind of library you are in or how much you know - or don't - about linked data - we're all in some stage of learning.)
 
https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!forum/glamlod

Also, we are interested in voices and resources outside of libraries, too (though we hope to keep the focus somewhat regional). 

ExLibris joins W3C Schema Bib Extend Community Group (Schema.org)

So very cool!  Exactly - library bib data has a very viable place in the larger semantic web - ESPECIALLY, our controlled vocabularies (subject headings) and authority (series and names) data. 

-------------------

Ex Libris joins W3C Schema Bib Extend Community Group, part of the Schema.org linked data initiative http://http://www.librarytechnology.org/ltg-displaytext.pl?RC=17470 

----------

:"Our customer community is very keen to take advantage of linked data methodology," remarked Oren Beit-Arie, chief strategy officer at Ex Libris. "At our recent international user meeting, a special interest working group on linked open data was established and members wrote a manifesto in support of linked open data. We have already begun discussing with the working group various ways in which we can use linked data in our solutions."

About Schema.org

Schema.org is platform where the Web community can come together and share structured schemas that improve the ability for search engines to understand the content of Web pages.

Launched just over a year ago, the Schema.org initiative, backed by Google, Yahoo, Microsoft, Yandex, and others, has been very successful in encouraging the sharing of structured data on the Web. Within a year, search engines were already seeing more than 7% of pages crawled containing Schema.org markup.

For more information, see the schema.org blog at http://blog.schema.org/.

Bibliographic Framework Initiative (MARC replacement) update

New document released from LoC: Bibliographic Framework as a Web of Data: Linked Data Model and Supporting Services http://www.loc.gov/marc/transition/pdf/marcld-report-11-21-2012.pdf

The new, proposed model is simply called BIBFRAME, short for Bibliographic Framework. The new model is more than a mere replacement for the library community's current model/format, MARC. It is the foundation for the future of bibliographic description that happens on, in, and as part of the web and the networked world we live in. It is designed to integrate with and engage in the wider information community while also serving the very specific needs of its maintenance community - libraries and similar memory organizations. It will realize these objectives in several ways:

1. Differentiate clearly between conceptual content and its physical manifestation(s) (e.g., works and instances)

2. Focus on unambiguously identifying information entities (e.g., authorities)

3. Leverage and expose relationships between and among entities

In a web-scale world, it is imperative to be able to cite library data in a way that not only differentiates the conceptual work (a title and author) from the physical details about that work's manifestation (page numbers, whether it has illustrations) but also clearly identifies entities involved in the creation of a resource (authors, publishers) and the concepts (subjects) associated with a resource. Standard library description practices, at least until now, have focused on creating catalog records that are independently understandable, by aggregating information about the conceptual work and its physical carrier and by relying heavily on the use of lexical strings for identifiers, such as the name of an author. The proposed BIBFRAME model encourages the creation of clearly identified entities and the use of machine-friendly identifiers which lend themselves to machine interpretation for those entities.

and thus we start our march to semanticizing our bibliographic data by looking to linking data, which will allow us to have more flexibility in terms of constructing records (& relationships), better authority and bibliographic control (fix in one place, change is propagated across records which consist of aggregated data presented in a framework (most likely in near future, fields), and the ability for our data bits to be harvested (if our data is open) and used outside of traditional library catalogs ...

Semantic Web - My definition

A more highly evolved internet that is data driven and flexible, relying on machines to make actions, links, and more.

From the user perspective, the Semantic Web will be a customized and personalized user experience, working with the devices that they have in a way that they wish to interact with the web.

Searches are more relevant, needs are anticipated before expressed, and filters are more effective.

Linked data, more robust machines, and better data will make this happen.


What is your definition?

Semantic web, linked data - libraries in Georgia

Laura, Doug & I will be discussing linked data, semantic web and library projects (including what Emory is up to) at COMO on Thursday. I will also be doing a more general metadata session on Thursday morning.
In addition to all of that Doug and Laura have started GLAMLOD as a discussion group for linked data, semantic web, and metadata topics -- not necessarily limited to the state of Georgia.

Information about the discussion group is below:
Hello,

Calling to your attention, a new interest group and a Google Group discussion list created by Laura Akerman and Doug Goans from Georgia Tech, to act as a mailing list, targeted to people from Georgia cultural heritage institutions who are interested in or involved with implementing linked data technology, publishing linked open data or using it.    You can find the group here:

https://groups.google.com/group/glamlod/

If you're interested, we encourage you to visit the group site and request an invitation to join.  A fuller description of the group and some details about joining follow.

Georgia Libraries Archives and Museums Linked Open Data (GLAMLOD) is limited to members in the state of Georgia in order focus on the use and implementation of Linked Open Data for cultural heritage organizations in the state. GLAMLOD supports the LOD learning community in Georgia and acts as a resource for those actively wanting to use and implement Linked Open Data (LOD). GLAMLOD will also be an information hub for LOD members to initiate discussions, collaborations, meetups, workshops, guest speakers, or other activities.

The group aims to move beyond abstract discussion to focus on actions and results related to LOD and our institutions. Some possible topics to start the discussion include:

* Industry and Professional use and adoption of LOD (Google, Facebook, OCLC)

* Georgia institutional use and adoption of LOD (what activities are happening, what roadblocks exist and what can be done to accommodate LOD)

* Develop learning groups and links to resources for current and future members to understand LOD at both a conceptual and technical level.

The Google Groups site has been set up so that people must request an invitation to join; this is to try to keep out spam.  Please indicate your institution and interest in Linked Data when you join; we'll approve your request.  If you've not used Google Groups before, you may need to verify your email address, but a gmail or other Google account should not be required.

The first message is moderated, but after that, the list will be open to anyone to post messages, from either the web interface or by sending email from the address you signed up with.  You can change email address or remove yourself from the group through the group web site.

If you have any problems joining the group, you can email Laura (liblna -at- emory -dot- edu) or Doug (doug.goans -at- library -dot- gatech.edu ) for help.

robin

You can get there from here: AACR2 / MARC>RDA / FRBR / Semantic web

Although my graphics didn't turn out too nicely at slideshare, overall I think this covers what I'd like my staff to understand about RDA and FRBR in terms of foundation knowledge. We build from here...

Rda intro.pptx from robin f

Linked data, Libraries - How, Why & MARC

Two excellent presentations together, one focused on MARC/linked data; the second focuses on user experience but in terms of how linked data and the FRBR (Functional Requirements of Bibliographic Records) model could possibly impact that experience.

The first (Philip E. Schreur, Stanford) focuses on bibliographic data and MARC.  Really great overview and explanation of linked data and its potential impact on libraries with a focus on MARC records and library data, name authority records/control, bibliographic data, and how linking data works. Also discusses challenges of traditional data control (siloed data, etc.) and how linked data can address those challenges. Great example using a music bib record (~13 minutes). 

The second presentation (Jennifer Bowen, Univ. of Rochester, at about 16 minutes in) starts out with a study of users but then moves to whether linked data can meet their needs (and how). Examples of tools include Drupal (the newest version of which does have semantic web functionalities built in). FRBR (Functional Requirements of Bibliographic Records) data model/linked data discussion starts about 37 minutes.

 
http://www.infodocket.com/2012/08/28/new-video-from-cni-linked-data-for-libraries-why-should-we-care-where-should-we-start/

Semantic Web Technologies & Social Search (Introduction to Metadata)

This first chapter outlines the book but also includes a nice overview of metadata and how it fits into the web at large (and really all of the records we create). If you are new to metadata or interested in learning how metadata works on the web (& perhaps, try a few projects), you are definitely the audience we were targeting.

While the context of the book is library related, the projects can easily be done by individuals, institutions, or businesses. Michael & I cover projects like enriching metadata in Flickr, building a web/contacts directory using microformats, and how to contribute to the very cool civil war history semantic web project (thanks to Jon Voss) - among many other projects. Along the way, we discuss metadata (did you know your camera creates metadata?) and show you how to use metadata for better searching across the web - the whole web - social media to the wild web. Semantic Web and Social Searching

Talking about metadata for images & literacy standards, linked data and semantic web for libraries,

Just a quick update - so much going on professionally this Fall. Teaching, teaching, teaching for Lyrasis (I hope to be teaching on linked data and semantic webby goodness soon plus the usual standards), just picked up reviewing articles for GLQ, chapter  in prepub (When do I have time to be professionally active?) coming out in Time Organization for Librarians: Beating Budget and Staff Cuts to be published by Scarecrow Press (2013), Semantic Web Technologies and Social Searching for Librarians now available, and 3 presentations/2 workshops/bootcamp (conferences: Information Literacy; COMO; GeekEnd; DrupalCamp coming up. I think I may have 1 more proposal for the Fall, if I can remember when the IT Conference is at RockEagle. Yeah, there is a reason I wrote a chapter entitled, "When do I have time to be professionally active?" ;-) (Promise it is NOT all on the weekend, tho bootcamps often are).

So, here are the topics for the presentations:

Making the digital connection: linkeddata & libraries (COMO)
Linked data and libraries are hot topics, not only for staff in archives, institutional repositories, and digital/web initiatives, but also for catalogers, with FRBR and RDA hovering on the horizon. In this session, Robin Fay (UGA), Laura Akerman (Emory University), and Doug Goans (Ga Tech) will introduce linked data, explore some linked data library related projects and resources, and discuss how linked data and open data fits in with the Semantic Web.

Participants will:
*Gain a basic understanding of linked data
*Discover new library projects
*Gain a better understanding of how linked data will drive our future systems and how it fits into the future of the web -- the semantic web

 
Title: Metadata Makes the World Go Around: an Introduction to Metadata in a Web-Based World (COMO)

Did you know metadata is everywhere? Did you know that you are a metadata creator? This fun & dynamic intro to metadata explores how data drives the web, devices (mp3 players, etc), library catalogs and more, and how we create and edit that metadata.

Participants will:

*Gain a better understanding of how data drives the web

*How devices and platforms work together

*Basic introduction including terminology for metadata, the semantic web, and linked data

----------------------

Georgia International Conference on Information Literacy

Visual Literacy in a Digital Age  

What is it? Does it involve social media and if so how? How can we use visual literacy in all of our teaching and training? Explore visual literacy, focusing on the new ACRL visual literacy standards, especially as relates to digital media hosted on sites such as Flickr, Youtube and the Internet Archive.

 Participants will leave with a better understanding
visual literacy standards and the basics of multimedia related metadata, as well as ideas for incorporating multimedia into teaching and training.  

Semantic web, linked data & metadata proposals for GLA

I thought you might like to see what I'm pitching for GLA/COMO this year. If either of these do not make the program, I will shop them around elsewhere:


Proposal 1 (Solo):
Metadata makes the world go round: an introduction to metadata
Did you know metadata is everywhere? Did you know that you are a metadata creator? This fun & dynamic intro to metadata explores how data drives the web, devices (mp3 players, etc), library catalogs & more and how we create and edit that metadata. 

Participants will:
*Gain a basic understanding of core types of metadata as used in libraries and on the web
*How library metadata fits into the larger web
*Explore uses of metadata from social media sites like Flickr to desktop applications like Microsoft Office documents to search engines (SEO - search engine optimization)

[I'll focus alot on the concept that metadata is everywhere and drives everything from devices (like mp3 players) to web tools like Flickr.]

Making the digital connection: linkeddata & libraries (w/ 2 colleagues)
Linked data and libraries are hot topics, not only for staff in archives, institutional repositories, and digital/web initiatives, but also for catalogers, with FRBR and RDA hovering on the horizon. In this session, [ ] will introduce linked data, explore some linked data library related projects and resources, and discuss how linked data and open data fits in with the Semantic Web.

Participants will:
*Gain a basic understanding of linked data
*Discover new library projects
*Gain a better understanding of how linked data will drive our future systems and how it fits into the future of the web -- the semantic web

Wish me luck. I think these will be alot of fun. I've done some version of the metadata one several times with good response. I haven't presented with my 2 rockstar colleagues before, so definitely will be shall I say.... AWESOME?!?!?

LC Bib Framework (MARC replacement)

from an email via a listserv... 

Library of Congress Announces Modeling Initiative

.... [snip] 

The Library of Congress has asked Zepheira to provide a model (or models) that can serve as a strong starting point for discussion, and an analysis of related initiatives underway that will be useful to this effort.  LC expects that the proposed model(s) will change and be further tuned based on valuable feedback from the community and a natural progression of requirements as they are addressed. The initial model(s) will serve as a basis for work focused on a demonstration system/service which will then, in turn, be used to further refine the model(s). The expectation is that such iterative feedback loops will eventually ensure a flexible bibliographic framework, a robust reference code, a supporting infrastructure for deployment, and an effective migration plan to support the community in making a transition from MARC to a new framework.

The Library of Congress will now proceed to organize various scenarios to enable community participation that will be broad and include international users and partners, various types of information agencies and libraries, and library suppliers.  We will be posting information as it emerges from this initial work, especially relating to projected milestones at the Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative website (www.loc.gov/marc/transition). 

The Library intends to offer its plan of action for discussion and community input at the American Library Association Annual Conference in Anaheim, California. Eric Miller will join the Library in this update session.  (LC Bibliographic Framework Transition Update Forum, Sunday, June 22, 10:30am-12:00 noon, Anaheim Marriott Grand Salon A-C.)