Introduction defining context and scope
The technological review for cataloguing covers a subset of the differents concepts to be managed in catalogues, as seen in requirement section.
- References catalogues: persons and organisations, publications, research objects.
- Federated catalogues: datasets, resources, physical samples, procedures and software
Activity and event logs have not been considered in the technology review because the subject is not mature enough in RI and ICT to manage this information in catalogue yet. As a matter of priority, we focus on references and federated catalogues described above.
The review gives an overview of the software applications or systems and interface standards used for cataloguing related information.
Change history and amendment procedure
The review of this topic will be organised by in consultation with the following volunteers: Type @ followed by first letters of person's name. They will partition the exploration and gathering of information and collaborate on the analysis and formulation of the initial report. Record details of the major steps in the change history table below.For further details of the complete procedure see item 4 on the Getting Started page.
Note: Do not record editorial / typographical changes. Only record significant changes of content.
| Date | Name | Institution | Nature of the information added / changed |
|---|---|---|---|
| date | Type @ followed by first letters of person's name | Acronym of institution | A remark on the information added or changed |
Sources of information used
The standards considered are provided by the follwing bodies:
RDA working groups (e.g. metadata) as well as domain specific standards (cerif, geoscienceml, …) are also considered.
The tools are open-source or not. They might be desktop or server side (with web interface) software.
Two-to-five year analysis
References catalogues
- Persons and organizations: The most popular system for persons identification and cataloguing is currently OrcID. They are involved in THOR project which helps to connect together datasets, paperts and researchers information. They are also working on organization cataloguing (http://orcid.org/blog/2016/03/09/organisations-missing-link).
- Publications management systems cited by RI are web of knowledge (http://apps.webofknowledge.com) and scopus (http://www.scopus.com/).
- For research objects no technology have been cited. Further investigation would be required.
Federated catalogues:
- dataset catalogues are managed at RI level with CKAN in the Open Data world and RDA or geonetwork in the ISO and OGC. It sounds pragmatic and feasible to harvest existing CKAN and geonetwork in one CKAN central server (e.g. at EUDAT).
- resources, especially observation equipment are managed in dedicated systems at RI level, however two standards are popular to describe these items: SSN ontology from W3C and sensorML from OGC.
- physical samples are managed in dedicated systems. No common standard have been identified yet. However we can expect to type of solution from 1) biology discipline 2) from solid earth
- procedures and software: to be completed.
Overall solutions: CERIF proposed by EPOS provides an overall conceptual model for managing the above information.
To BE completed
State of the art
One paragraph describing the current state of the art.
Trends
Subsequent headings for each trend (if appropriate in this HL3 style)
Paragraph(s) describing a trend(s).
Problems to be overcome
Sub-headings as appropriate in HL3 style (one per problem)
A short paragraph describing a problem to be overcome or barrier in the way of progress.
Details underpinning above analysis
Please supply here any additional information that can help to justify the previous section e.g., references to material that someone can look up for themselves.
Sketch of a longer-term horizon
e.g., 5-10 years ahead. Your best judgement about the future direction of technology and research trends (0.5 - 1 page).
Relationships with requirements and use cases
Link your analysis of the topic with particular identified requirements and use cases, as this will increase the relevance and help others understand your insights. Consider using tables to do this (0.5 - 1 page).
Summary of analysis highlighting implications and issues
This section should be suitable for the deliverable and also understandable on its own, without the need to read the rest of the material. A discussion of areas where ENVRIplus should change its plans as a result of your conclusions, and of open questions would be very useful here (0.25 - 0.5 pages)
Bibliography and references to sources
Insert numbered list of sources / references.