Tcd june 2009 ecp-2007-edu-4 27015/Share. Tec multicultural Metadata Model for Interoperability



страница1/9
Дата05.01.2017
Размер1.19 Mb.
#11809
  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9

TCD June 2009

ECP-2007-EDU-4 27015/Share.TEC

Share.TEC


Multicultural Metadata Model
for Interoperability



Deliverable number

D3.1

Dissemination level

Public

Delivery date

June 2009

Status

Final version

Nature

Report

Authors

Inmaculada Arnedillo Sanchez &
Anna-Marie Higgins (TCD)


Contact

Macu.Arnedillo@cs.tcd.ie




eContentplus

This project is funded under the eContentplus programme1,


a multiannual Community programme to make digital content in Europe more accessible, usable and exploitable.


TABLE OF CONTENTS


1. ABSTRACT

……………………...

3










2. PREAMBLE TO THIS FINAL VERSION OF D3.1

……………………...

3










3. TASK PROCESS

……………………...

3










4. CMM MULTICULTURAL EXTENSION ELEMENTS

……………………...

4










5. CULTURAL DIFFERENCES

……………………...

5










6. MULTICULTURAL METADATA EXTENSIONS



















6.1 BULGARIAN

……………………..

7




6.2 DUTCH

……………………..

16




6.3 ITALIAN

……………………..

27




6.4 SPANISH

……………………..

38




6.5 SWEDISH

……………………..

48










7. APPENDICES

……………………..

57


1. ABSTRACT
Work Package 3 (WP3) focuses on interoperability. Its overall objectives are to extend the Common Metadata Model (CMM) in order to acknowledge cultural and linguistic differences, to build the Metadata Migration Facility and to populate the metadata repository. Deliverable 3.1 (D3.1) deals with the first of these three stages, Multicultural Metadata Model for Interoperability. Drawing on the cultural extensions of the Teacher Education Ontology (TEO), the CMM is extended to capture specific semantic, linguistic and contextual differences and to define the relations between these. This ensures the system’s linguistic and cultural interoperability, allowing cross-cultural access to resources. D3.1 forms part of D3.2 (Ontology & Metadata Models release version).
Keywords
Teacher Education, Ontology, Common Metadata Model, Interoperability, Multicultural Metadata Model, Cultural Context, Elements, Instances, Multicultural Extensions.

2. PREAMBLE TO THIS FINAL VERSION OF D3.1
We understood that the multicultural extension was to be done by the partners to capture the multicultural nuances in relation to the cultural and educational reality of each country.


  1. This means that there would be some level of 'straightforward' linguistic translation in cold elements of the Common Metadata Model for instances 1, 2 , 3, 4 and 6

  2. However, elements 9 and 10 which provided scope for multicultural extension were to be 'localised' rather than translated.

  3. As Work Package leaders and lead authors of D3.1, TCD could only guide, structure and manage the work to be done by the partners but had no means of evaluating whether, or to what extent, the multicultural extension delivered by the partners capture multicultural instances as intended.  

  4. Given the partners' expertise we trust that their multicultural extensions do in fact represent their national and cultural realities.

  5. As it sheds light on the partners’ views on issues raised by D3.1, the discussion that arose during the task as well as the feedback from the first draft of D3.1 have been incorporated into the present report.



3. TASK PROCESS
Periodic monitoring of Task 3.1 (T3.1) occurred throughout the task period, through formal and informal discussions, in order to observe the progress and to facilitate the flow of information. The following process led to the compilation of D3.1. An analysis of the Common Metadata Model for European Teacher Education contexts was made. This involved analyzing the CMM that had been presented in D2.2, then seeking and gathering feedback through discussions on the CMM and TEO integration. During the next stage, an analysis of the draft TEO mapping against CMM took place. An agreement was reached by all partners on stable elements of the CMM, namely elements 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6. Later, integration of TEO mapping against CMM for elements 9 and 10 of the CMM was achieved. A detailed plan of feedback and input procedures was drawn up during the third phase. A sample of the feedback form for CMM elements was produced and guidelines for supporting partners’ feedback and other input were issued. Aspects of T3.1 were discussed and opinions were aired by the partners (Appendix A). A linguistic and cultural translation of the CMM was carried out by all of the partners. In order to capture and incorporate cultural differences into this deliverable, they were asked to provide instances of challenges that they had met in this respect while doing the translation. This would give greater depth and breadth to the document. Responses were received (Appendix B). The linguistic and cultural translations of the CMM were integrated and the first draft of the D3.1 was presented for internal review. A further discussion ensued between the partners (Appendix C). Feedback on specific areas was noted and incorporated into this final version of the report.

4. CMM MULTICULTURAL EXTENSION ELEMENTS
The classification of the metadata is built on the Learning Object Metadata standard (LOM) and adds elements that are appropriate for the field of Teacher Education.
Thus, it is a result of mapping the CMM and the TEO and is an output of WP2.
There are nine information types for each of the seven categories in the specification. These are:


  • Number

  • Name

  • Explanation

  • Size,

  • Order

  • Value Space

  • Data Type

  • Example and

  • Whether Mandatory or Recommended

The seven categories are subdivided.


Category 1 has eight elements:
1. General

1.1 Identifier

1.1.1 Catalogue

1.1.2 Entry

1.2 Title

1.3 Language

1.4 Description

1.5 Keyword



Category 2 has five elements:
2. Lifecycle

2.3 Contribute

2.3.1 Role

2.3.2 Entity

2.3.3 Date

Category 3 has nine elements:
3. Meta-metadata

3.1 Identifier

3.1.1 Catalogue

3.1.2 Entry

3.2 Contribute

3.2.1 Role

3.2.2 Entity

3.2.3 Date

3.4 Language
Category 4 has three elements:
4. Technical

4.1 Format

4.3 Location
Category 6 has four elements:
6. Rights

6.1 Cost


6.2. Copyright and other restrictions

6.3 Description


Category 9 has seven elements:
9. Classification

9.1 Purpose

9.2 Taxon path

9.2.1 Source

9.2.2 Taxon

9.2.2.1 ID

9.2.2.2 Entry
Category 10 has nine elements:
10. TE Pedagogical Metadata

10.1 Employment Mode

10.2 Interactivity Type

10.3 Digital Content Type

10.4 Non-Pedagogically Structured Type

10.5 Pedagogically Structured Features

10.5.1 Pedagogically Structured Type

10.5.2 Didactic Strategy



10.5.3 Collaboration Level


5. CULTURAL DIFFERENCES
In case a mere linguistic translation might lose the richness and diversity of the European cultural contexts, partners were asked to describe the challenges that they had to confront in completing the linguistic translations, particularly the difficulty of capturing specific nuances. The Irish partners observed that the terminology used in the elements was not “culturally biased” and it would be possible to include and describe resources from different countries, contexts and cultures. The content itself would provide the multicultural dimension. In the case of some languages the translation was a relatively trouble-free task and the cultural context nuances were integrated in the direct translation from the original document. For others, however, this proved less straightforward.
The literal translation of “learning object” into Italian, for example, is “Oggetto di apprendimento” but this does not fully capture the meaning implied by the English expression. Unfortunately, other possible Italian expressions also fail to embrace all the nuances of the original concept. Furthermore, the English expression, “learning object”, is generally used in Italy to identify re-usable learning resources. This points towards a disparity between its usage by online trainers, academics and technicians in the e-learning field and traditional school and academic teachers. It must also be noted that the “learning object” concept sometimes carries negative connotations, being identified simply with decontextualized chunks of content for self-learning, thereby ignoring the support of collaborative learning. So, the Italian partners decided to use the Italian expression, “risorsa educativa digitale” (literally “digital educational resource”), even if it limits the set of the educational resources to the “digital” ones (which is true for the Share.TEC project, but not for the LOM standard [IEEE, 2002]).
The CMM is based on the LOM v1.0 Schema [IEEE, 2002] and derives from it a lot of technical expressions.

It was felt that technical terms (especially those ones located in “Size” and “Data type” columns), such as for example “Langstring” or “LangCode” should not be translated, because they are only for internal use.
Other LOM-specific expressions have also been hard to translate. In particular, some problems were encountered in identifying the slight difference in the meaning of “entry” (1.1.2 and 3.1.2), “metadata record” (3 and 3.1.2) and “metadata instance” (3.2 and 3.2.2). Possible translations for these included “entry”, as a specific string characterizing a learning object or a metadata record; “metadata record”, as the complete set of metadata associated to a learning object and “metadata instance”, as the specific set of metadata provided in a particular moment by a particular contributor. These terms are not easily translated into Italian, for example and partners usually chose to adopt a literal translation approach, even if the resulting expressions are not so user-friendly.
Some problems were also encountered when translating the vocabulary of values associated with the “10.5.2 - Didactic Strategy” element. At times, a roundabout description is needed to explain a didactic strategy. Partners from Sweden, Holland and Italy stated that their educators often use English expressions when discussing didactic strategies, even when English is not the language of the discussion. However, despite this anomaly, we have provided the closest possible versions of the terminology required by this deliverable.

NOTE
Drawing down the Italian CMM Multicultural extension, the Italian partners realized that the educational resources that are going to be managed by the Share.TEC system are referenced as “learning objects” in categories 1 to 9 (according to LOM schema) and as “digital contents” in category 10 (according to TEO). They think that a unique term should be adopted and that the consortium should find a shared opinion about it. This point is clarified in D2.3.

6. MULTICULTURAL METADATA EXTENSIONS

Note: The Common Metadata Model is the basis for Multicultural Metadata Model development, so when providing data in their own languages for the MMM, partners referred to the CMM, which was presented in English in a previous report.
6.1 BULGARIAN
ELEMENT 1 IN BULGARIAN



Но = Номер


Неопр = Неопределена


Зад = Задължителен


Преп = Препоръчителен



Но


Име

Обяснение

Размер

Наредба

Стойност

Тип данни

Пример

Зад/
Преп


1


Общ

Тази категория съдържа обща информация описваща този ресурс


1

Неопр

-


-

-

Зад

1.1


Идентификатор

Еднозначен в глобалната мрежа идентификатор който се използва за еднозначно обръщение към този ресурс


Най-малък допустим, не повече от 10 елемента

Неопр

-

-


-

Зад

1.1.1


каталог

Име на задаващия идентификатора, или схемата за именуване (namespace scheme)


1

Неопр

Част от стандарта ISO/IEC 10646- 1:2000

Низ от символи (най-малък допустим, максимум 1000 символа)




Зад

1.1.2


запис

Стойност на идентификатора в рамките на избраната схема, която го идентифицира еднозначно.


1

Неопр

Част от стандарта ISO/IEC 10646- 1:2000

Низ от символи (най-малък допустим, максимум 1000 символа)




Зад

1.2


Име

Името на този ресурс

1

Неопр




Низ от символи (най-малък допустим, максимум 1000 символа)

("bg", "Животът и творчеството на Леонардо да Винчи")

Зад

1.3

Език

Основен език или езици, използван в този ресурс за комуникация с предполагаемия потребител

Най-малък допустим, не повече от 10 елемента

Няма наредба

LanguageID = код език ("-"субкод)* където код език е кода на език, дефиниран в ISO 639:1988, и субкод (който може да се появи произволен брой пъти) е код на страна съгласно ISO 3166- 1:1997.

Низ от символи (най-малък допустим, максимум 100 символа)

"en",

"en-GB",


"de",

"fr-CA",


"it"

"grc"


(древна Гърция, преди 1453)

"en-US-philadelphia"

"eng-GB-cockney"

"map-PG-buin"

(Австронезия –Папуа Нова Гвинея – buin)

"gem-US-pennsylvania"




Зад

1.4

Описание

Текстово описание на съдържанието на този ресурс

Най-малък допустим, не повече от 10 елемента

Няма наредба

-

Низ от символи (най-малък допустим, максимум 2000 символа)

("en", "В този видеоклип накратко се представя живота и творчеството на Леонардо да Винчи. Фокусът е върху живописните му произведения, и най-вече Мона Лиза.")


Зад

1.5

Ключови думи

Ключови думи или фрази описващи този ресурс.

Не трябва да се използва за определения, които се описват от други елементи. За разлика от част 9, където определянето става в рамките на класификация тук се използва свободен текст.




Най-малък допустим, не повече от 10 елемента

Неопр

-

Низ от символи (най-малък допустим, максимум 2000 символа)

("en", "Mona Lisa")
("bg", "Мона Лиза")

Преп



Сподели с приятели:
  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9




©obuch.info 2024
отнасят до администрацията

    Начална страница