Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Conference Proceeding (20)
- Part of a Book (2)
- Article (1)
- Other (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (24)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (24) (remove)
Keywords
- Datenmanagement (16)
- Metadaten (15)
- Computerlinguistik (11)
- Forschungsdaten (10)
- Forschung (7)
- CLARIN (6)
- Infrastruktur (6)
- Archivierung (3)
- Bibliografische Daten (3)
- Bibliothekskatalog (3)
Publicationstate
- Veröffentlichungsversion (24) (remove)
Reviewstate
- Peer-Review (19)
- (Verlags)-Lektorat (4)
Publisher
- European Language Resources Association (ELRA) (6)
- European Language Resources Association (5)
- CLARIN (2)
- Aisthesis (1)
- Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften (1)
- CLARIN-D (1)
- Deutsche Gesellschaft für Sprachwissenschaft (1)
- Linköping University Electronic Press (1)
- MIT Press (1)
- Stanford University Library (1)
Creating and maintaining metadata for various kinds of resources requires appropriate tools to assist the user. The paper presents the metadata editor ProFormA for the creation and editing of CMDI (Component Metadata Infrastructure) metadata in web forms. This editor supports a number of CMDI profiles currently being provided for different types of resources. Since the editor is based on XForms and server-side processing, users can create and modify CMDI files in their standard browser without the need for further processing. Large parts of ProFormA are implemented as web services in order to reuse them in other contexts and programs.
XML has been designed for creating structured documents, but the information that is encoded in these structures are, by definition, out of scope for XML. Additional sources, normally not easily interpretable by computers, such as documentation are needed to determine the intention of specific tags in a tag-set. The Component Metadata Infrastructure (CMDI) takes a rather pragmatic approach to foster interoperability between XML instances in the domain of metadata descriptions for language resources. This paper gives an overview of this approach.
This paper presents the system architecture as well as the underlying workflow of the Extensible Repository System of Digital Objects (ERDO) which has been developed for the sustainable archiving of language resources within the Tübingen CLARIN-D project. In contrast to other approaches focusing on archiving experts, the described workflow can be used by researchers without required knowledge in the field of long-term storage for transferring data from their local file systems into a persistent repository.
Data Management is one of the core activities of all CLARIN centres providing data and services for the academia. In PARTHENOS, European initiatives and projects in the area of the humanities and social sciences assembled to compare policies and procedures. One of the areas of interest is data management. The data management landscape shows a lot of proliferation, for which an abstraction level is introduced to help centres, such as CLARIN centres, in the process of providing the best possible services to users with data management needs.
The paper’s purpose is to give an overview of the work on the Component Metadata Infrastructure (CMDI) that was implemented in the CLARIN research infrastructure. It explains, the underlying schema, the accompanying tools and services. It also describes the status and impact of the CMDI developments done within the CLARIN project and past and future collaborations with other projects.
This paper proposes a methodology for querying linguistic data represented in different corpus formats. Examples of the need for queries over such heterogeneous resources are the corpus-based analysis of multimodal phenomena like the interaction of gestures and prosodic features, or syntax-related phenomena like information structure which exceed the expressive power of a tree-centered corpus format. Query languages (QLs) currently under development are strongly connected to corpus formats, like the NITE Object Model (NOM, Carletta et al., 2003) or the Meta-Annotation Infrastructure for ATLAS (MAIA, Laprun and Fiscus, 2002). The parallel development of linguistic query languages and corpus formats is due to the fact that general purpose query languages like XQuery (Boag et al., 2003) do not fulfill the changing needs of linguistically motivated queries, e.g. to give access to (non-)hierarchically organized, theory and language dependent annotations of multi modal signals and/or text. This leads to the problem that existing corpus formats and query languages are hard to reuse. They have to be re developed and re-implemented time-consumingly and expensively for unforeseen tasks. This paper describes an approach for overcoming these problems and a sample application.
The Component MetaData Infrastructure (CMDI) is a framework for the creation and usage of metadata formats to describe all kinds of resources in the CLARIN world. To better connect to the library world, and to allow librarians to enter metadata for linguistic resources into their catalogues, a crosswalk from CMDI-based formats to bibliographic standards is required. The general and rather fluid nature of CMDI, however, makes it hard to map arbitrary CMDI schemas to metadata standards such as Dublin Core (DC) or MARC 21, which have a mature, well-defined and fixed set of field descriptors. In this paper, we address the issue and propose crosswalks between CMDI-based profiles originating from the NaLiDa project and DC and MARC 21, respectively.
Datenmanagement wird durch die Forschungsföderungsorganisationen (etwa in Horizon 2020 der EU, die Allianz der deutschen Wissenschaftsorganisationen oder in DFG geförderten Projekten) mehr und mehr Teil der Forschungslandschaft. Für die Computerlinguistik ist das Forschungsdatenmanagement aber auch Teil des Forschungsgebietes: Datenmodellierung und Transformation für die nachhaltige Datenspeicherung gehören in den Bereich der Texttechnologie und Textlinguistik, ebenso die Modellierung der beschreibenden Daten zu Datensätzen.
In this chapter, we discuss steps toward extending CMDI’s semantic interoperability beyond the Social Sciences and Humanities: We stress the need for an initial data curation step, in part supported by a relation registry that helps impose some structure on CMDI vocabulary; we describe the use of authority file information and other controlled vocabulary to help connecting CMDI-based metadata to existing Linked Data; we show how significant parts of CMDI-based metadata can be converted to bibliographic metadata standards and hence entered into library catalogs; and finally we describe first steps to convert CMDI-based metadata to RDF. The initial grassroots approach of CMDI (meaning that anybody can define metadata descriptors and components) mirrors the AAA slogan of the Semantic Web (“Anyone can say Anything about Any topic”). Ironically, this makes it hard to fully link CMDI-based metadata to other Semantic Web datasets. This paper discusses the challenges of this enterprise.
This paper uses a devil’s advocate position to highlight the benefits of metadata creation for linguistic resources. It provides an overview of the required metadata infrastructure and shows that this infrastructure is in the meantime developed by various projects and hence can be deployed by those working with linguistic resources and archiving. Possible caveats of metadata creation are mentioned starting with user requirements and backgrounds, contribution to academic merits of researchers and standardisation. These are answered with existing technologies and procedures, referring to the Component Metadata Infrastructure (CMDI). CMDI provides an infrastructure and methods for adapting metadata to the requirements of specific classes of resources, using central registries for data categories, and metadata schemas. These registries allow for the definition of metadata schemas per resource type while reusing groups of data categories also used by other schemas. In summary, rules of best practice for the creation of metadata are given.
To optimize the sharing and reuse of existing data, many funding organizations now require researchers to specify a management plan for research data. In such a plan, researchers are supposed to describe the entire life cycle of the research data they are going to produce, from data creation to formatting, interpretation, documentation, short-term storage, long-term archiving and data re-use. To support researchers with this task, we built DMPTY, a wizard that guides researchers through the essential aspects of managing data, elicits information from them, and finally, generates a document that can be further edited and linked to the original research proposal.
The Component MetaData Infrastructure (CMDI) is the dominant framework for describing language resources according to ISO 24622 (ISO/TC 37/SC 4, 2015). Within the CLARIN world, CMDI has become a huge success. The Virtual Language Observatory (VLO) now holds over 800.000 resources, all described with CMDI-based metadata. With the metadata being harvested from about thirty centres, there is a considerable amount of heterogeneity in the data. In part, there is some use of controlled vocabularies to keep data heterogeneity in check, say when describing the type of a resource, or the country the resource is originating from. However, when CMDI data refers to the names of persons or organisations, strings are used in a rather uncontrolled manner. Here, the CMDI community can learn from libraries and archives who maintain standardised lists for all kinds of names. In this paper, we advocate the use of freely available authority files that support the unique identification of persons, organisations, and more. The systematic use of authority records enhances the quality of the metadata, hence improves the faceted browsing experience in the VLO, and also prepares the sharing of CMDI-based metadata with the data in library catalogues.
In diesem Panel geht es um die Förderung der geisteswissenschaftlichen Forschung durch eine planvolle Erhebung, Archivierung, Veröffentlichung und die dadurch ermöglichte Nachnutzung von Forschungsdaten, die sowohl zur Qualitätssicherung in der Forschung beitragen als auch nicht zuletzt neue Fragestellungen erlauben. Aus unterschiedlichen Perspektiven soll in dem Panel beleuchtet werden, welchen Mehrwert das Datenmanagement für die Forschung in den digitalen Geisteswissenschaften hat, wie man diesen Mehrwert erreicht und auch die Veröffentlichung der Forschungsdaten als ein selbstverständliches Element der Dissemination der Forschungsergebnisse etabliert und wie man gleichzeitig den Aufwand für die Forschung abschätzen kann.
This paper describes the ongoing work to integrate WebLicht into the CLARIN infrastructure. It introduces the CLARIN infrastructure for scholars in the humanities and social sciences as well as WebLicht - an orchestration and execution environment that is built upon Service Oriented Architecture principles. The integration of WebLicht into the CLARIN infrastructure involves adapting it to the standards and practices used within CLARIN, including distributed repositories, CMDI metadata, and persistent identifiers.
The Component MetaData Infrastructure (CMDI) provides a lego-brick framework for the creation, use and re-use of self-defined metadata formats. The design of CMDI can be a force forgood, but history shows that it has often been misunderstood or badly executed. Consequently,it has led the community towards the dark ages of metadata clutter rather than the bright side of semantic interoperability. In this abstract, we report on the condition of CMDI but also outlinean agenda to make the CMDI world a better place to use, share and profit from metadata.
Wenn man verschiedenartige Forschungsdaten über Metadaten inhaltlich beschreiben möchte, sind bibliografische Angaben allein nicht ausreichend. Vielmehr benötigt man zusätzliche Beschreibungsmittel, die der Natur und Komplexität gegebener Forschungsressourcen Rechnung tragen. Verschiedene Arten von Forschungsdaten bedürfen verschiedener Metadatenprofile, die über gemeinsame Komponenten definiert werden. Solche Forschungsdaten können gesammelt (z.B. über OAI-PMH-Harvesting) und mittels Facetten-basierter Suche über eine einheitliche Schnittstelle exploriert werden. Der beschriebene Anwendungskontext kann über sprachwissenschaftliche Daten hinaus verallgemeinert werden.
The transfer of research data management from one institution to another infrastructural partner is all but trivial, but can be required,for instance, when an institution faces reorganisation or closure. In a case study, we describe the migration of all research data, identify the challenges we encountered, and discuss how we addressed them. It shows that the moving of research data management to another institution is a feasible, but potentially costly enterprise. Being able to demonstrate the feasibility of research data migration supports the stance of data archives that users can expect high levels of trust and reliability when it comes to data safety and sustainability.
Lexicography
(2008)
Lexicon schemas and their use are discussed in this paper from the perspective of lexicographers and field linguists. A variety of lexicon schemas have been developed, with goals ranging from computational lexicography (DATR) through archiving (LIFT, TEI) to standardization (LMF, FSR). A number of requirements for lexicon schemas are given. The lexicon schemas are introduced and compared to each other in terms of conversion and usability for this particular user group, using a common lexicon entry and providing examples for each schema under consideration. The formats are assessed and the final recommendation is given for the potential users, namely to request standard compliance from the developers of the tools used. This paper should foster a discussion between authors of standards, lexicographers and field linguists.
This paper describes the status of the standardization efforts of a Component Metadata approach for describing Language Resources with metadata. Different linguistic and Language & Technology communities as CLARIN, META-SHARE and NaLiDa use this component approach and see its standardization of as a matter for cooperation that has the possibility to create a large interoperable domain of joint metadata. Starting with an overview of the component metadata approach together with the related semantic interoperability tools and services as the ISOcat data category registry and the relation registry we explain the standardization plan and efforts for component metadata within ISO TC37/SC4. Finally, we present information about uptake and plans of the use of component metadata within the three mentioned linguistic and L&T communities.
The Component Metadata Infrastructure (CMDI) in a project on sustainable linguistic resources
(2012)
The sustainable archiving of research data for predefined time spans has become increasingly important to researchers and is stipulated by funding organizations with the obligatory task of being observed by researchers. An important aspect in view of such a sustainable archiving of language resources is the creation of metadata, which can be used for describing, finding and citing resources. In the present paper, these aspects are dealt with from the perspectives of two projects: the German project for Sustainability of Linguistic Data at the University of Tubingen (NaLiDa, cf. http://www.sfs.uni-tuebingen.de/nalida) and the Dutch-Flemish HLT Agency hosted at the Institute for Dutch Lexicology (TST-Centrale, cf.http://www.inl.nl/tst-centrale). Both projects unfold their approaches to the creation of components and profiles using the Component Metadata Infrastructure (CMDI) as underlying metadata schema for resource descriptions, highlighting their experiences as well as advantages and disadvantages in using CMDI.
Measuring the quality of metadata is only possible by assessing the quality of the underlying schema and the metadata instance. We propose some factors that are measurable automatically for metadata according to the CMD framework, taking into account the variability of schemas that can be defined in this framework. The factors include among others the number of elements, the (re-)use of reusable components, the number of filled in elements. The resulting score can serve as an indicator of the overall quality of the CMD instance, used for feedback to metadata providers or to provide an overview of the overall quality of metadata within a repository. The score is independent of specific schemas and generalizable. An overall assessment of harvested metadata is provided in form of statistical summaries and the distribution, based on a corpus of harvested metadata. The score is implemented in XQuery and can be used in tools, editors and repositories.
Linguistics is facing the challenge of many other sciences as it continues to grow into increasingly complex subfields, each with its own separate or overarching branches. While linguists are certainly aware of the overall structure of the research field, they cannot follow all developments other than those of their subfields. It is thus important to help specialists but also newcomers alike to bushwhack through evolved or unknown territory of linguistic data. A considerable amount of research data in linguistics is described with metadata. While studies described and published in archived journals and conference proceedings receive a quite homogeneous set of metadata tags — e.g., author, title, publisher —, this does not hold for the empirical data and analyses that underlie such studies. Moreover, lexicons, grammars, experimental data, and other types of resources come in different forms; and to make things worse, their description in terms of metadata is also not uniform, if existing at all. These problems are well-known and there are now a number of international initiatives — e.g., CLARIN, FlareNet, MetaNet, DARIAH — to build infrastructures for managing linguistic resources. The NaLiDa project, funded by the German Research Foundation, aims at facilitating the management and access to linguistic resources originating from German research institutions. In cooperation with the German SFB 833 research center, we are developing a combination of faceted and full-text search to give integrated access through heterogeneous metadata sets. Our approach is supported by a central registry for metadata field descriptors, and a component repository for structured groups of data categories as larger building blocks.