Open Repositories 2007 Plenary Session 5: Interoperability

January 26, 2007

Carl Lagoze presented the OAI-ORE project. Emphasised that ORE is not just about asset transfer – it’s about interoperability between systems that manage content, and systems that leverage (sic ;-)) managed content.

Their mantra: “Whatever we do it must be congruent with the web architecture”, as the web architecture is reasonably well developed engineering (!). Failing to do this was a failure in OAI-PMH.

Carl gave an overview of Web Architecture pointing out that representations don’t have locators / identifiers, and that there’s no standard way of defining a finite set of resources on the web. The ORE Model fixes this, formally expressing a bounded aggregation of resources and relationships – a connected sub-graph.

ORE resources are access points for service requests, and services are in three classes: Harvest, Obtain and Register. (There was an implication that ORE Harvest service would replace PMH in the future).

What now? Flesh out use cases as a tool for testing the model, Review appropriate technologies, move from model to implementation (after May 2007 meeting).

Comment: I like the sound of ORE much better than it sounded in the Pathways days. The resource centric bits sound good, but there devil will be in the detail of the verb set and how that works.

Julie Allinson presented the JISC Repository Deposit Service Description project. (Disclosure: I’m involved in this work and also the JISC Common Repository Interfaces Group).

The purpose of this work was to come up with a lightweight standard for deposit across the different repository platforms and for projects on the JISC repositories program that would provide a short term fix until somebody (think “ORE”) came up with the right answer.

The scope of Deposit in this work was pre-ingest – and purely concerns the mechanism of getting content to a repository platform and not the ongoing process of ingest, which may involve e.g. format migration, human editorial mediation etc.

The service itself consists of three parts – a deposit service description (which is the richest in terms of information provided), a very simple (HTTP POST and a few standard part names) and a receipt.

One Response to “Open Repositories 2007 Plenary Session 5: Interoperability”

  1. […] This is a basic introduction to the work of the technical committee so far. For a more in-depth view into the outcomes of the first face-to-face meeting, including expanded definitions and examples of what was outlined here, see the Report of the January 2007 ORE-TC Meeting. In addition, there is a interview with Herbert van de Sompel recorded at the CNI 2006 Fall Task Force to go along with a project briefing presented at that meeting. (Keep in mind that these were recorded and presented before the first technical committee meeting, so some of the concepts of the implementation have changed.) Pete Johnson, a member of the ORE technical committee, posted his thoughts on the topic on his blog: Prospecting for ORE, More ORE, and More ruminations on compoundness and complexity (and metadata). The presentation slides from Carl Lagoze’s talk at Open Repositories 2007 are also available, of which Chris Wilper and Jim Downing posed summaries and reactions. Also keep an eye on the OAI-ORE tag on Technorati for more updates and reactions. Footnotes“Architecture of the World Wide Web, Volume One” paragraph #98. Available from Accessed Feb 16 2007. [↩]The Web Architecture allows for the Representation of a Resource to be decided through content negotiation between the agent/browser and the server. [↩] […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: