1. CC-interop and SCONE extending collection-level description Gordon Dunsire & Dennis Nicholson Presented to Mapping the information landscape: a showcase of collection description projects and services, British Library, London, 25 March 2003

2. CC-interop project "COPAC/Clumps interoperability" Continuing technical cooperation Lead site: London School of Economics and Political Science 2 work packages A: Cross-searching COPAC and clumps B: Enhance the role of clumps (in the JISC IE)

3. Work package B Using CAIRNS (CDLR) and RIDING clumps with SCONE CLD service for Investigating and specifying collection description standards requirements Enhancing the coverage of clumps Compiling cataloguing and indexing standards in clumps Landscaping of mini-clumps

4. CLD schemes compared Survey of clumps, collection description services, and draft schemas InforM25, JISC, MIMAS, Mapping Wales, RASCAL, RIDING, SCONE. Report "Extending the SCONE collection descriptions database for cc-interop" Includes a comparative data dictionary for the schemes Schemes compared against the entity-relationship analysis of collection description by Michael Heaney

5. CLD schemes High degree of structural compatibility Heaney analysis and RSLP implementation Less compatibility in content standards Functional granularity: different purposes of CLD services Legacy: Clumps before RSLP Report extends Heaney's analysis, and identifies content interoperability issues

6. Interoperability issues Collection identifiers Name headings; Personal name data elements Physical location data elements Date ranges (3 different meanings) Service level description (at embryonic stage) + (via HILT II project): Collection-description (catalogue) subject schemes

7. Collection identifiers No common or interoperable scheme of assigning identifiers Usually database driven Functional granularity will proliferate CLDs for sub-collections Local and service (global) views Service emphasis: landscaping criteria Severe impairment of cross-linking, recycling, harvesting, minimising duplication

8. Cross-searching CLD services Importance of personal and corporate names Owners, Collectors, Subjects, Administrators, etc. Geographic locations: towns Access to physical collections still necessary Support for collaborative, cross-sectoral collection policies + C-D subject schemes From subject landscaping to item-level discovery

9. Extending SCONE Additional attributes and data elements identified in report Agent: Administrator: Corporate body: Logo Collection: Content: Sound material: Language Collection: Content: Text: Language Collection: Educational level Collection: Classification/Subject scheme And others Important for resource discovery, landscaping and portals in Scotland and beyond …

10. CLDs & Distributed Content 1994 CATRIONA Model: “It is likely that internet opacs will be categorised according to their subject strengths and that users will be able to search … for records of other opacs strong on a particular subject category” 1995 – RCO – Conspectus-based collection strength measures – distributed subject collections – web and telnet catalogues 1999 – CAIRNS – RCO and dynamic landscaping – cross-searching distributed subject collections

11. CLDs & Distributed Content 2000/02 – SCONE and SEED – SCONE collections service - Conspectus alternatives – embryonic SCAMP collection management portal; DDC CS indices? Institution – specific landscapes? 2002/05 – HILT (collections and subjects), CC-Interop (landscaping beyond CAIRNS, Riding Clone), HaIRST (collaborative collecting) 2003 – SPEIR – SCI - key role of CLD in collaborative collection management, resource discovery, portal management recognised

12. Projected Scottish Co-operative Infrastructure: Feb. ‘03 Various user nodes ‘Global’ links: Cross domain Scone; SCAN; Museums Resource + JISC IE LOOK CERL COSMIC co-ordination: Cultural Portal GDL-like Portals Connexion CoSMiC Task Group Portal Support Pub-Lib Portals Other Portals SCONE HaIRST Landscaper SCAMP(1) SDDL etc: Sapiens Authentication Terminologies Support Services Interoperability & Standards Online LIS Support via SLAINTE/BUBL Mini-clump SCAMP(2) CAIRNS NLS Joint R&D Plan Regional, Sectoral, SI Groups Scotslink; WIDWISAWN SLIC

13. Why? Users increasingly use/need distributed resources, finding tools so co-operation now essential as well as desirable Users/organisations need own portals Distributed networked collections need collaborative management Coherent distributed virtual ‘libraries’ won’t just happen – we must co-operate to manage retrieval/user environments Institutional and other boundaries are becoming a barrier to providing what users need

14. Thank you Gordon Dunsire g.dunsire@strath.ac.uk Dennis Nicholson d.m.nicholson@strath.ac.uk CC-interop project homepage http://ccinterop.cdlr.strath.ac.uk/ Extending SCONE report http://ccinterop.cdlr.strath.ac.uk/Documents/ PDF-WordDocs/ExtendSCONEReport.pdf SCONE service http://scone.strath.ac.uk/service/index.cfm