Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Standards and Communities: Connected People, Consistent Data, Usable Applications

Keynote presentation at JCDL 2019 at UIUC, on the interaction between standards (development and usage) and communities. Looking at Linked Open Data, digital library protocols, and evaluation of standards practices.

  • Login to see the comments

Standards and Communities: Connected People, Consistent Data, Usable Applications

  1. 1. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu Standards and Communities: Connected People, Consistent Data, Usable Applications Rob Sanderson Semantic Architect J. Paul Getty Trust rsanderson@getty.edu @azaroth42
  2. 2. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu Continuing the Conversation? Photo by RahenZ, Flickr • Innovation • Sustainability • Adaptability • Community
  3. 3. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu The nice thing about standards is there’s so many to choose from - Andrew S. Tanenbaum Digital Library Standards
  4. 4. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu • Z39.50 • SRU+CQL • OAI-PMH • Resource Sync • OAI-ORE • Memento • Open Annotation • IIIF • LOUD - Linked Art “My” Digital Library Standards ?
  5. 5. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu “My” Digital Library Standards • Z39.50 • SRU+CQL • OAI-PMH • Resource Sync • OAI-ORE • Memento • Open Annotation • IIIF • LOUD - Linked Art • Implementer (ZIG) • Editor • Implementer • Editor • Editor • Editor • Editor • Editor • Editor
  6. 6. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu Why? Interoperability! Facets of Interoperability: 1. Interoperating Entities (People, Organizations) 2. Objects of Interaction 3. Functional Perspective of Interoperability 4. Linguistic Interoperability (Multilingualism) 5. Design and User Perspectives 6. Technological Standards Stefan Gradman, doi 10.1.1.363.6311
  7. 7. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu Why? Impact! Adam Selwood, Flickr, Milford Sounds NZ
  8. 8. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu Digital is a Means Not an End W3C – 20th Anniversary, October 2014
  9. 9. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu Working Together – Without Meetings Bernard Spragg, Flickr, Keas at Mt Hutt, NZ
  10. 10. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu Working Together – Without Meetings Airflore, Flickr, Kea Mangeur
  11. 11. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu Connecting People: Standardization Scale
  12. 12. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu Who can be involved? How can they be involved? Who is it for? How can they be involved? Standards and Communities
  13. 13. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu Process Features? Key features of successful standards work: • Focused: Solve real problems from within • Open: Requirement is participation not reputation • Active: Constant attention to product & process • Flexible: Adapt to changing situation Or … FOAF
  14. 14. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu Project Scale: Open Archives Initiative Scale: 1 project at once Who: Herbert & Carl plus invited Process: Email, Meetings, Releases Audience: Limited domain, Limited involvement Outreach: Participants at existing conferences Outreach events Benefits: Focused, Flexible But: Not very Open, hard to keep Active/Attention * * Yes, Memento is not OAI
  15. 15. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu Scale: 1 project at once Who: LC plus invited implementers Process: Email, Meetings, Documentation Audience: Limited domain, Limited Involvement Outreach: Participants at existing conferences Benefits: Focused, Flexible But: Not very Open, hard to keep Active/Attention Project+ Scale: Library of Congress
  16. 16. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu Community Scale: IIIF Scale: 2.5 projects at once Who: Open community, Non-gating consortium Process: Formal, agile process defined, Releases Audience: Community, Open Involvement Outreach: Participants at existing conferences Outreach events Dedicated conference Benefits: Focused (-ish), Open, Active, Flexible (enough) But: How to resist the slippery slope of success?
  17. 17. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu Web Scale: W3C Scale: 25-30 projects at once Who: Gating consortium + invited experts Process: Formal process defined Audience: Web, Community Groups Outreach: Dedicated conferences, Workshops Press releases, Member organizations Conferences, Outreach, … Benefits: Focused? Open? Active? Flexible? But: Easy to argue against the above! ?
  18. 18. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu 341 W3C Community Groups…
  19. 19. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu Global Scale: ISO, ICOM Scale: ????? projects at once Who: Member countries / organizations Process: Formal processes Audience: Everyone? Outreach: ????? Benefits: ????? But: !!!!!!
  20. 20. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu Standards are Made Of By People Linked Art, 2019 IIIF, 2016 W3C TPAC, 2014
  21. 21. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu Community Engagement Pyramid Leaders Experts Contributors Members Watchers /ht Katherine Skinner, @educopia
  22. 22. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu Community Leadership 1. Know Your Audience 2. Meet on Their Terms 3. Have a Conversation 4. Create Opportunities for Meaningful Participation /ht Catherine Bracy, @cbracy
  23. 23. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu Standards and Communities: Design Principles
  24. 24. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu Evaluation /ht Michael Barth, Ulm University  Abstraction level  Comprehensibility  Consistency  Discoverability / Documentation  Domain Correspondence  Few Barriers to Entry  Extensibility  Infrastructure
  25. 25. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu Evaluation – Trade Offs? 1. Basic: Functionality vs Comprehensibility 2. Ease: API Publisher vs API Consumer 3. Scale: Community vs Audience (+ Abstraction & Domain)
  26. 26. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu Functionality vs Comprehension
  27. 27. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu Functionality vs Comprehension
  28. 28. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu Functionality vs Comprehension
  29. 29. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu API Publisher vs API Consumer
  30. 30. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu API Publisher vs API Consumer
  31. 31. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu API Publisher vs API Consumer
  32. 32. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu API Publisher vs API Consumer
  33. 33. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu Community Scale vs Audience Scale
  34. 34. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu Community Scale vs Audience Scale
  35. 35. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu Community Scale vs Audience Scale
  36. 36. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu Community Scale vs Generality
  37. 37. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF Design Patterns 1. Scope design through shared use cases 2. Design for international use 3. As simple as possible, but no simpler 4. Make easy things easy, complex things possible 5. Avoid dependency on specific technologies 6. Use REST / Don’t break the web 7. Separate concerns, keep APIs loosely coupled 8. Design for JSON-LD, using LOD principles 9. Follow existing standards, best practices 10. Define success, not failure (for extensibility) https://iiif.io/api/annex/notes/design_patterns/
  38. 38. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu W3C Priority of Constituencies In case of conflict, consider … https://www.w3.org/TR/html-design-principles/ “ ” users … over authors … over implementors … over theoretical purity. Everyone Annotators Tool Builders Ontology
  39. 39. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu Linked Open Data
  40. 40. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu Usable Linked Open Data
  41. 41. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu Usable? … usability is the degree to which [a thing] can be used by specified consumers to achieve [their] quantified objectives with effectiveness, efficiency, and satisfaction in a quantified context of use. who what how where Usability is dependent on the Audience https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/usability “ ”
  42. 42. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu With thanks to Patrick Hochstenbach, @hochstenbach Who is the Audience for LOD?
  43. 43. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu LOUD: Easy to Use … by Developers!
  44. 44. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu The API is the Developers’ User Interface When it comes to APIs, developers are your users. The same principles of user- centred-design apply to the development and publication of APIs (simplicity, obviousness, fit-for-purpose etc) http://apiguide.readthedocs.io/en/latest/principles/empathy.html “ ”
  45. 45. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu W3C Priority of Constituencies In case of conflict, consider … https://www.w3.org/TR/html-design-principles/ “ ” users … over authors … over implementors … over theoretical purity. Developers Data Editors Tool Builders Ontology
  46. 46. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu Usable (API) vs Complete (Model)
  47. 47. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu Usable (API) vs Complete (Model)
  48. 48. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu Usable (API) vs Complete (Model)
  49. 49. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu Target Zone
  50. 50. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu Incremental Complexity
  51. 51. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu Linked.Art https://linked.art/
  52. 52. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu Linked Art Profile A Linked Open Usable Data model, collaboratively designed to work across cultural heritage organizations, that is easy to publish and enables a variety of consuming applications. Main Design Principles: • Focused on Usability, not 100% precision / completeness • Consistently solves actual challenges from real data • Development is iterative, as new use cases are found • Solve 90% of use cases, with 10% of the effort
  53. 53. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu Linked Art Collaboration Working to formalize the profile, funded by Kress & AHRC • Getty • Rijksmuseum • Louvre • Metropolitan Museum of Art • Smithsonian • MoMA • V&A • NGA • Philadelphia Art Museum • Indianapolis Art Museum • The Frick Collection • Harvard University • Princeton University • Yale Centre for British Art • Oxford University • Academica Sinica • ETH Zurich • FORTH • Zeri Foundation (U. Bologna) • Canadian Heritage Info. Network • American Numismatics Society • Europeana
  54. 54. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu [Standards] By the People, For the People
  55. 55. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu [Standards] By the People, For the People Functional Comprehensible Complete Usable Publisher Consumer … … …
  56. 56. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu No Magic Bullet Focused, Open, Active, Flexible
  57. 57. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu Create Opportunities for Meaningful Participation By The People
  58. 58. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu Thank You! Rob Sanderson rsanderson@getty.edu @azaroth42
  59. 59. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu Thank You! Discuss! Rob Sanderson rsanderson@getty.edu @azaroth42
  60. 60. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu Functionality vs Comprehension
  61. 61. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu API Publisher vs API Consumer
  62. 62. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu Community Scale vs Audience Scale
  63. 63. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu Usable (API) vs Complete (Model)
  64. 64. @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu IIIF:Interoperabilituy Standardsand Communities @azaroth42 rsanderson @getty.edu Standards https://xkcd.com/927/

×