Hey Worldcat Identities you are doing awesome work–you deserve some REST. Why not use content-negotiation to serve up your HTML and XML representations? So:
curl --header "Accept: text/html" http://orlabs.oclc.org/Identities/key/lccn-no99-10609
would return HTML and
curl --header "Accept: application/xml" http://orlabs.oclc.org/Identities/key/lccn-no99-10609
would return XML. This would allow you to:
not be limited to XSLT driven user views (doesn’t that get tedious?)
allow you to scale to other sorts of output (application/rdf+xml, etc)
At least from the outside I’d have to disagree w/ Roy – it appears that institutions can and do innovate. But I won’t say it is easy …
If it isn’t already, put the Linking Open Data project on your radar. It’s a grassroots effort to make large data sets available on the web. These aren’t just tarballs sitting in an FTP directory either–they’re URL addressable information resources available in machine readable format. A few weeks ago Joshua Tauberer announced the availability of the US Census as close to 1 billion triples. If you like data and the web the discussion list is a wonderful place to watch these data sets getting released and linked together.
High 5, more dead than alive
Rockin’ the plastic like a man from a casket
Yeah, the blog is back after getting routed by the LinuXploit Crew. The whole episode was really rewarding actually. I learned what projects I work on that need to be hosted elsewhere at more stable locations–that are likely to outlive my pathetic musings. I (re)learned how important good friends are (ksclarke, dchud, wtd, jaf, gabe, rsinger) in a pinch. And I watched in awe as the Wordpress 2.2 upgrade actually worked on my pathologically old instance (which I suspect to have been the front door). Oh, and it was a good excuse to ditch gentoo for ubuntu.
Spring cleaning came a bit late this year I guess. Thanks LinuXploit Crew!
pymarc 1.0 went out day before yesterday with a new function: marc8_to_unicode(). When trying to leverage MARC bibliographic data in today’s networked world it is inevitable that the MARC8 character encoding will at some point rear its ugly head and make your brain hurt. The problem is that the standard character set tools for various programming languages do not support it. So you need to know to use a specialized tool like marc4j, yaz, MARC::Charset for converting from MARC8 into something useful like Unicode. The MARC8 support in pymarc is the brainchild of Aaron Lav and Mark Matienzo. Aaron gave permission for us to package up some of is code from PyZ3950 into pymarc. In testing with equivalent MARC-8 and UTF-8 record batches from the Library of Congress we were able to find and fix a few glitches. The exercise was instructive to me because of my previous experience working with the MARC::Charset Perl module. When I wrote MARC::Charset I was overly concerned with not storing the mapping table in memory, I used an on disk Berkeley-DB originally. Aaron’s code simply stored the mapping in memory. Since python stores bytecode on disk after compiling there were some performance gains to be had over Perl–since Perl would compile the big mapping hash every time. But the main thing is that Aaron seemed to choose the simplest solution first– whereas I was busy performing a premature optimization. I also went through some pains to enable mapping not only MARC-8 to Unicode but Unicode back to MARC-8. In hindsight this was a mistake because going back to MARC-8 is increasingly more insane as each day passes. Aaron’s code as a result is much cleaner and easier to understand because, well, there’s less of it. I’m reading Beautiful Code at the moment and was just reading Jon Bentley’s chapter “The Most Beautiful Code I Never Wrote” – which really crystallized things. Definitely check out Beautiful Code if you have a chance. Maybe the quiet books4code could revive to read it as a group?
Pete Johnston blogged recently about a very nice use of the Atom Publishing Protocol (APP) to provide digital library repository functionality. The project is supported by UKOLN at the University of Bath and is called Simple Web-service Offering Repository Deposit (SWORD).
If you are interested in digital repositories and web services take a look at their APP profile. It’s a great example of how APP encourages the use of the Atom XML format and RESTful practices, which can then be extended to suit the particular needs of a community of practice.
To understand APP you really only need to grok a handful of concepts from the data model and REST. The data model is basically made up of a service document, which describes a set of collections, which aggregates member entries, which can in turn point to a media entry. All of these types of resources are identified with URLs. Since they are URLs you can interact with the objects with plain old HTTP–just like your web browser. For example you can list the entries in a collection by issuing a GET to the collection URL. Or you can create a member resource by doing a POST to the collection URL. Similarly you can delete a member entry by issuing a DELETE to the member entry. The full details are available in the latest draft of the RFC–and also in a wide variety of articles including this one.
So to perform a SWORD deposit a program would have to:
get the service document for the repository (GET http://www.myrepository.ac.uk/app/servicedocument
see what collections it can add objects to
create some IMS, METS or DIDL metadata to describe your repository object and ZIP it up with any of the objects datastreams
POST the zip file to the appropriate collection URL with the appropriate X-Format-Namespace to identify the format of the submitted object
check that you got a 201 Created status code and record the Location of the newly created resource
1 and 2 are perhaps not even necessary if the URL for the target collection is already known. Some notable things about the SWORD profile of APP:
two levels of conformance (one really minimalistic one)
the idea that collections imply particular treatments or workflows associated with how the object is ingested
service documents dynamically change to describe only the collections that a particular user can see
no ability to edit resources
no ability to delete resources
no ability to list collections
repository objects are POSTed as ZIP files to collections
HTTP Basic Authentication + TLS for security
the use of DublinCore to describe collections and their respective policies.
collections can support mediated deposit which means deposits can include the X-On-Behalf-Of HTTP header to identify the user to create the resource for.
the use of X-Format-Namespace HTTP header to explicitly identify the format of the submission package that is zipped up: for example IMS, METS or DIDL.
While I understand why update and delete would be disabled for deposited packages I don’t really understand why the listing of collections would be disabled. An atom feed for a collection would essentially enable harvesting of a repository, much like ListRecords in OAI-PMH.
I’m not quite sure I completely understand X-On-Behalf-Of and sword:mediation either. I could understand X-On-Behalf-Of in an environment where there is no authentication. But if a user is authenticated couldn’t their username be used to identify who is doing the deposit? Perhaps there are cases (as the doc suggests) where a deposit is done for another user?
All in all this is really wonderful work. Of particular value for me was seeing the list of SWORD extensions and also the use of HTTP status codes. If I have the time I’d like to throw together a sample repository server and client to see just how easy it is to implement SWORD. I did try some experiments along these lines for my presentation back in February…but they never got as well defined as SWORD.
I don’t know … but it sure is nice to see that 26 Nobel Laureates at least understand the direction libraries ought to be headed:
As scientists and Nobel laureates, we are writing to express our strong support for the House and Senate Appropriations Committees’ recent directives to the NIH to enact a mandatory policy that allows public access to published reports of work supported by the agency. We believe that the time is now for Congress to enact this enlightened policy to ensure that the results of research conducted by NIH can be more readily accessed, shared and built upon to maximize the return on our collective investment in science and to further the public good.
The public at large also has a significant stake in seeing that this research (researched funded by the National Institute of Health) is made more widely available. When a woman goes online to find what treatment options are available to battle breast cancer, she will find many opinions, but peer-reviewed research of the highest quality often remains behind a high-fee barrier. Families seeking clinical trial updates for a loved one with Huntington’s disease search in vain because they do not have a journal subscription. Librarians, physicians, health care workers, students, journalists, and investigators at thousands of academic institutions and companies are currently hindered by unnecessary costs and delays in gaining access to publicly funded research results.
Exciting times for libraries and the medical profession! I just hope they can convince Congress.
It’s great to see that OCLC is going to work with Zepheira on a new version of the PURL service and that it’s going to have an Apache license. Other than addressing scalability issues it sounds like Zepheira is going to build in support for resources that are outside of the information space of the web:
The new PURL software will also be updated to reflect the current understanding of Web architecture as defined by the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C). This new software will provide the ability to permanently identify networked information resources, such as Web documents, as well as non-networked resources such as people, organizations, concepts and scientific data. This capability will represent an important step forward in the adoption of a machine-processable “Web of data” enabled by the Semantic Web.
Since Eric Miller helped start up Zepheira it’s not surprising that purl2 will take this on. As part of some experiments I’ve been doing with SKOS, and serving up Concepts over HTTP it has become clear that a minimal bit of work for managing these identifiers would be useful. I can definitely see the need for a general solution that helps manage identifiers for people, organizations, concepts, etc. which also fits into how HTTP should/could serve up the resources associated with them.
via Thom Hickey
Thanks to some prodding from William Denton and Jason Ronallo and the kindness of Laurent Sansonetti I’ve been added as a developer to the ruby-zoom project which provides a Ruby wrapper to the yaz Z39.50 library. I essentially wanted to remove some unused code from the project that was interfering with the ruby-marc gem … and I also wanted to create gem for ruby-zoom. This was the first time I’ve tried packaging up a C wrapper as a gem and it was remarkably smooth. I also added a test suite and a Rakefile. So assuming you have yaz installed you can install ruby-zoom with:
% gem install zoom
I’ll admit, I’m no huge fan of Z39.50 but the fact remains that it’s pretty much the most widely deployed machine API for getting at bibliographic data locked up in online catalogs. It’s really nice to see forward thinking systems at Talis, Evergreen and Koha who have (or at least experimented with) OpenSearch implementations.
If you are interested in practical ways to garden in the emerging web-of-data take a look at this draft finding that folks in the W3C Technical Architecture Group are considering. Or for a different expression of the same idea look at Cool URIs for the Semantic Web.
These two documents describe a simple use of HTTP and URLs to identify resources that are outside of the information space of the web. Yes, you read that right: resources that are outside the information space of the web. Why would I want to use URLs to address resources that aren’t on the web!? The finding illustrates this subtlety using Angela’s dilemma:
Angela is creating an OWL ontology that defines specific characteristics of devices used to access the Web. Some of these characteristics represent physical properties of the device, such as its length, width and weight. As a result, the ontology includes concepts such as unit of measure, and specific instances, such as meter and kilogram. Angela uses URIs to identify these concepts.Having chosen a URI for the concept of the meter, Angela faces the question of what should be returned if that URI is ever dereferenced. There is general advice that owners of URIs should provide representations [AWWW] and Angela is keen to comply. However, the choices of possible representations appear legion. Given that the URI is being used in the context of an OWL ontology, Angela first considers a representation that consists of some RDF triples that allow suitable computer systems to discover more information about the meter. She then worries that these might be less useful to a human user, who might prefer the appropriate Wikipedia entry. Perhaps, she reasons, a better approach would be to create a representation which itself contains a set of URIs to a range of resources that provide related representations. Perhaps content negotiation can help? She could return different representations based on the content type specified in the request.
Angela’s dilemma is, of course, based on the fact that none of the representations she is considering are actually representations of the units of measure themselves. Even if the Web could deliver a platinum-iridium bar with two marks a meter apart at zero degrees celsius, or 1,650,763.73 wavelengths of the orange-red emission line in the electromagnetic spectrum of the krypton-86 atom in a vacuum, or even two marks, a meter apart on a screen, such representations are probably less than completely useful in the context of an information space. The representations that Angela is considering are not representations of the meter itself. Instead, they are representations of information resources related to the meter.
It is not appropriate for any of the individual representations that Angela is considering to be returned by dereferencing the URI that identifies the concept of the meter. Not only do the representations she is considering fail to represent the concept of the meter, they each have a different essence and so they should each have their own URI. As a consequence, it would also be inappropriate to use content negotiation as a way to provide them as alternate representations when the URI for the concept of the meter is dereferenced.
So assuming we are agreed about the problem what’s the solution? Basically you can use content negotiation and a 303 See Other HTTP status code to redirect to the appropriate resource. For an example of the basic idea in action fire up curl and take a look at how this instance of the SemanticMediaWiki responds to a GET request:
% curl --head http://ontoworld.org/wiki/Special:URIResolver/Ruby
HTTP/1.1 303 See Other
Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 20:03:12 GMT
Server: Apache/2.2.3 (Debian) ...
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Nothing too surprising there–basically just got redirected to another URL that serves up some friendly HTML describing the Ruby programming language. But send along an extra Accept header:
% curl --head --header 'Accept: application/rdf+xml
HTTP/1.1 303 See Other
Date: Thu, 31 May 2007 20:04:36 GMT
Server: Apache/2.2.3 (Debian) ...
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Notice how you are redirected to another URL that results in rdf/xml describing Ruby coming down the pipe? RubyOnRails and other frameworks have good REST support built in for doing content negotiation to provide multiple representations of a single information resource. But the use of the 303 See Other here is a new subtle twist to accommodate the fact that the resource in question isn’t really a canonical set of bits on disk somewhere. The good news is that your browser will display the human readable resource when you visit http://ontoworld.org/wiki/Special:URIResolver/Ruby
Some folks would argue that resources that are outside the web don’t deserve URLs and should instead be identified with URIs like info-uris that are not required to resolve. My personal feeling is that info-uris do have a great deal of use in the enterprise (where they are most likely resolvable). But in situations like Angela’s where she is creating a public RDF document that needs to refer to concepts like “length” and “meter” I think it makes sense that these concepts should resolve to appropriate representations that will guide appropriate usage. Or as the Architecture of the World Wide Web puts it:
A URI owner may supply zero or more authoritative representations of the resource identified by that URI. There is a benefit to the community in providing representations. A URI owner SHOULD provide representations of the resource it identifies
It’ll be interesting to see how these issues shake out as more and more structured data is made available on the web.
v0.97 of MARC::Charset was just released with an important bugfix. If you’ve had the misfortune of needing to convert from MARC-8 to UTF-8 and have used MARC::Charset >= v0.8 to do it you may very well have null characters (0x00) in your UTF-8 data. Well, only if your MARC-8 data contained either of the following characters:
DOUBLE TILDE, SECOND HALF / COMBINING DOUBLE TILDE RIGHT HALF
LIGATURE, SECOND HALF / COMBINING LIGATURE RIGHT HALF
It turns out that the mapping file kindly provided by the Library of Congress does not include UCS mapping values for these two characters, and instead relies on alternate values.
v0.97 now uses the alternate value when the ucs is not available…which is good going forward. But I am literally sad when I think about how this little bug has added to the noise of erroneous extant MARC data. Please accept my humble apologies–and hear my plea to for bibliographic data that starts in Unicode rather than MARC-8. I’ll go further:
Don’t build systems that import/export MARC in transmission format anymore unless you absolutely have to.
Use MARCXML, MODS, RDF, JSON, YAML or something else instead. I realize this is hardly news but it feels good to be saying it. If you’re not convinced read Bill’s Pride and Prejudice installments. The library world needs to use common formats and encodings (with lots of tried/true tool sets)…and stop painting itself into a corner. Z39.2 has been hella useful for building up vast networks of data sharing libraries, but its time to leverage that data in ways that are more familiar to the networked world at large.
Many thanks to Michael O’Connor and Mike Rylander for discovering and resolving this bug.