The Developed Common Terminology(CT) 1.1

New Developed Websites (from January 1, 2015):

To achieve the goal of CT, as a prototype and a case study, a Common Terminology of widely used MARC, MODS, DC and QDC metadata formats has been developed since May 2012. The Common Terminology is a set of Common Terms of MARC & MODS and DC & QDC. The Common Terminology is developed based on crosswalks of Library of Congress (e.g., MARC to MODS, MARC to DC, MODS 3.4 to MARC, MODS 3.4 to DC, DC to MODS, and DC to MARC) (LC, Conversions). Actual metadata records of Harvard (MARC, 12 million records), UIUC (MARCXML, 10 million), and MIT (QDC, 20 thousand) were used in developing CT. The metadata records are used to investigate MARC tags usage and QDC elements usage with the specially designed Python programs. MARC tags usage of WorldCat and MARC tags usage in searchings are also referenced (Smith-Yoshimura, et al., 2010). The detail works for the CT project can be found in the paper, 'A Model and Roles of a Common Terminology to Improve Metadata interoperability' on http://hdl.handle.net/2142/50100.

1.   Definition of Common Terminology 

     The Purpose of Common Terminology is

     The Definition of Terms for Common Terminology is

2. Versions of the Developed Common Terminology

The current Common Terminology 1.1 

Prior Version CT 1.0

The CT version 1.0 came out finally in March 2014. But, it is modified and improved by reviewers into version 1.1. 

The developed Crosswalks for the CT 1.0 are (March, 2014):

3.   Improving Metadata Interoperability at the Schema Level

3.1.    The developed 12 Common Terms and 58 qualifiers 

3.2.   The Developed Crosswalks

         MARC(Harvard and UIUC) to CT Crosswalk

       (Q)DCto CT Crosswalk

4.  Improving Metadata Interoperability at the Schema Definition Language Level

4.1. ct.xsd

Practically, in XML schema (W3C, XML Schema), 12 Common Terms of CT are defined as elements, and 58 qualifiers are defined as attributes of type, authority, name, role, and source

4.2. ct.rdf

On the other hand, in RDF schema (W3C, RDF Schema 1.1, 2014), 12 Common Terms of CT are defined as properties, and type, name, role and source qualifiers as sub-properties. For example, CT:subject has type attributes such as type=”spatial” and type=”temporal”in XML schema, but in RDFs, they are defined as sub-property of subject property as the below. They are also defined and connected asnarrower relationships in SKOS concepts (W3C, SKOS Simple Knowledge Organization System Primer, 2009). An authority qualifier in XML is defined as a class in RDFs.

4.3. ctskos.rdf

The Common Terminology that has 12 Common Terms (elements/properties) and 58 qualifiers (sub-properties) with authorities (classes) is defined in SKOS as concepts with URIs. The defined SKOS concepts of CT clarify the relationships between properties(sub-properties) and CTSchemes in XML and RDF. CT is defined as a Concept Scheme in SKOS that has 12 top concepts for 12 Common Terms (properties) as the below (W3C, SKOS Simple Knowledge Organization System Reference, 2009). For example, CT:contributor is top concept of CT in CT 1.1 scheme and has two narrower terms (sub-properties), name and role. The role sub-property of contributor has narrower terms to designate the role of contributor such as author, creator, etc. that are defined the related CTRelator of CTScheme. The full SKOS concepts of CT are in Appendix C.

4.4. CT Diagrams

CT 1.1 diagram that indicates relationships between properties and sub-properties with authorities. The blue nodes represent properties and the yellow nodes represent sub-properties. The 12 Common Terminology 1.1 diagram shows all 12 properties (Common Terms) and 58 sub-properties (qualifiers) with authorities that are defined in CTScheme.

5.  Improving Metadata Interoperability at the Record Metadata Model Level

To improve metadata interoperability at the record level, a conversion is designed with Python language to convert MIT (QDC) records into the Common Terminology 1.1. This is a part of mapping experiments with conversions involving Harvard (MARC), MIT (QDC) and UIUC (MARCXML) metadata records. Another conversion for UIUC (MARCXML) to CT 1.1 is developed. The other conversion for Harvard (MARC or their description) is under development. It is to achieve and improve metadata interoperability at the record level among three universities’ libraries and among MARC (MODS), QDC (DC), and CT. This part was not possible without three universities’ cooperation. I really appreciate Harvard, MIT and UIUC persons who cooperate for CT project providing their metadata records.

Last Modified October 7, 2014