108計算機專業(yè)相關(guān)有關(guān)外文文獻(xiàn)翻譯成品從信息門戶到數(shù)字圖書館管理系統(tǒng)案例分析

1、<p>　　此文檔是畢業(yè)設(shè)計外文翻譯成品（ 含英文原文+中文翻譯），無需調(diào)整復(fù)雜的格式！下載之后直接可用，方便快捷！本文價格不貴,也就幾十塊錢！</p><p>　　外文標(biāo)題：From information gateway to digital library management system: a case analysis</p><p>　　外文作者：Karen Cal

2、houn</p><p>　　文獻(xiàn)出處:Library Collections, Acquisitions, and Technical Services 2002.26（2）：141-150</p><p>　　英文4516單詞，25321字符，中文7306漢字。</p><p>　　From information gateway to digital libr

3、ary management system: a case analysis</p><p><b>　　Abstract</b></p><p>　　This paper discusses the design, implementation and evolution of the Cornell University Library Gateway using

4、 the case analysis method. It diagnoses the Gateway within the conceptual framework of definitions and best practices associated with information gateways, portals, and emerging digital library management systems, in par

5、ticular the product ENCompass. </p><p>　　Keywords: Information gateways; Portals; Digital library management systems; Metadata; Cornell University Library Gateway; ENCompass</p><p>　　1.Introduct

6、ion</p><p>　　Using the case analysis method, this paper sets forth the facts and organizational circum- stances surrounding the design, implementation, and evolution of the Cornell University Library Gateway

7、—the networked information space that presents the Library’s collections, digital assets, Web sites, and services to its users (http://campusgw.library.cornell.edu/). The purpose of the case analysis is to expose a broad

8、 set of issues, decisions and alternatives associated with building the Gateway and wa</p><p>　　The paper first lays out a conceptual framework of definitions and best practices reported in selected current

9、literature on information gateways, portals, and digital library manage- ment systems. It then offers a diagnosis of the Library’s evolving networked information space through the lens of that framework. My primary inten

10、t in writing is to exchange ideas and experiences of possible value to other librarians who are implementing information discovery and management systems.</p><p>　　2.Background and definitions</p><

11、;p>　　For more than a decade, libraries have been responding to dramatic shifts in library users’ preferences and expectations for obtaining information and services. Like it or not, libraries have been faced with the

12、fact that the Internet greatly lowers the opportunity costs of obtaining information; and in the name of convenience, more and more users bypass the library’s resources in favor of the results they can get with an ordina

13、ry Internet search engine, even though these results are of question</p><p>　　Libraries have been experimenting with a number of models for information systems to serve up Internet-based content. These are i

14、nformation gateways, portals, and what some library professionals are calling “digital library management systems.”</p><p>　　2.1. Information gateways</p><p>　　DESIRE (Development of a European

15、Service for Information on Research and Education), an European Union funded project that ran from July 1998 until June 2000, focused on collaboration between project partners at ten institutions to enhance existing Euro

16、pean information networks. The project produced an excellent handbook for libraries and other organizations establishing information gateways on the Internet [1]. There are many ways to define “information gateways,” but

17、 the DESIRE handbook’s def</p><p>　　2.2. Portals</p><p>　　While there is no single definition of a portal, a helpful description was provided by Howard Strauss, Manager of Academic Applications

18、at Princeton University and an expert on the Web and higher education. Strauss presented a detailed look at portals, elements that might appear on them, and how they differ from home pages in a CREN (Corporation for Rese

19、arch and Educational Networking) Tech Talk [2].</p><p>　　Strauss defines a portal as a special kind of gateway to Web resources—“a hub from which users can locate all the Web content they commonly need.” In

20、describing how portals differ from a set of Web pages tied to a home page, one commentator in the Tech Talk said “a portal is user-centric, while a home page is owner-centric”—in other words, the site design is built aro

21、und some target community of users, rather than around the organization that hosts or “owns” the site. Elements that might appear </p><p>　　By Strauss’ definition, portals are customized to the role of the u

22、ser who connects to the portal. For example, a student or visitor to the portal might be able to connect to a limited number of channels, might be prevented from entering faculty members’ shared work spaces, and so on. P

23、ortals also feature personalization—for example, the ability to change the position of channels on the page or to create a personal profile for current awareness services. </p><p>　　Strauss discussed horizon

24、tal and vertical portals. An example of a horizontal portal is Yahoo—a source of extremely broad, but generally shallow content that a searcher can use to find anything they want on the Web. A university or library would

25、 be more likely to build a vertical portal, to focus on a specific community of users, and further to customize that view to different groups within that community, like students or a group of scholars in a discipline. A

26、n example is UCLA’s Humanities Web </p><p>　　Within the library world, the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) and other partners are pursuing the definition of a “scholar’s portal”—a vertical portal to

27、facilitate in-depth research and to make sense of the Web for scholars, including exposing the highest quality, most dependable content and permitting cross-collection searching [5,6]. Other proposed features of the scho

28、lar’s portal include virtual reference services, shared workspaces, tools to facilitate scholarly publishing, cross-pl</p><p>　　2.3. Digital library management systems</p><p>　　University librar

29、ies provide a home for a bewildering and rapidly growing set of digital assets, such as electronic books and journals, locally-produced databases, citation indexes, digitized texts and images, collections of digitized ph

30、otographs, and sound and video archives. It has become critical to systematically manage these assets in a way that brings them together logically and conveniently for use. Within a university library, it is highly desir

31、able to do this in a way that also supports</p><p>　　To understand more about the problem an effective digital library management system is intended to solve, consider the case of Library X. This hypothetica

32、l library has an online catalog containing records for about four million titles, mostly print. In addition, the library licenses about twenty thousand e-titles—including e-journals and e-books, online indexes, and numer

33、ic data files. Its bibliographers have selected several thousand important Web sites—especially ones valuable to area studies,</p><p>　　Recently, the Institute of Museum and Library Services (IMLS) convened

34、a group whose work is highly relevant to those with an interest in digital library management systems. The group’s “Framework of Guidance for Building Good Digital Collections” explores criteria for digital collections,

35、objects, metadata, and projects [7]. The writers define a collection of digital objects as “a selected and organized set of digital [objects] along with the metadata that describes them and at least one interf</p>

36、<p>　　The IMLS framework further states principles for “good” digital objects (e-books and articles, Word files, databases, Web sites, image files, etc.) and for “good” metadata. Good objects are digitized, named,

37、and described according to accepted standards or best practices, because doing so provides the foundation for discovering, reusing, repackaging, exchanging, and building services on these assets.</p><p>　　Pe

38、ople use metadata to describe, manage, and disseminate information about books and journals (the best known metadata system is perhaps a library catalog), personal research collections (like a set of slides), databases (

39、like a numeric file), Web sites (like a department home page), and even university courses. Good metadata makes collections and objects discoverable, accessible, manageable, and usable. The most common metadata categorie

40、s— there are others—are descriptive (helps users find and </p><p>　　The trouble with metadata is its diversity. There are hundreds, even thousands of metadata types that have been used to describe the Web-ac

41、cessible digital assets that are distributed around the world. Even in a single university environment, it is not practical or advisable to demand that those who publish or organize Web content utilize a single campus-wi

42、de metadata “standard.”</p><p>　　While there are a number of tried and true metadata systems and standards, and there are a variety of published metadata schemes, there are also many collection-specific, loc

43、ally developed metadata schemes in use. To achieve unified access to the widely distributed, variously described digital assets that are typically held within a university library, so that a single search can bring appro

44、priate resources together, requires metadata interoperability.</p><p>　　3.The case of the Cornell University Library Gateway</p><p>　　The Cornell University Library Gateway (http://library.corne

45、ll.edu/) is meant to be the common entryway to the networked resources, services and information that the Library provides for its users. The strategic intent of its introduction in January 1998 was to bring to an end ye

46、ars of confusion for Library users. Before the Gateway’s launch, different Cornell libraries (there are 19 of them) provided different ways to connect to different subsets of what the Library offered. The objectives of t

47、</p><p>　　The Gateway is made up of two principal parts—a home page, which functions as the Library’s home page, and the Gateway database (now called the “E-Reference Collection”), which is database of metad

48、ata about selected networked resources [12]. The metadata permits discovery of, then connection to, appropriate networked resources. User interaction is encouraged through a number of “Ask a Librarian” e-mail links, whic

49、h appear on all of the Gateway pages.</p><p>　　The Gateway database uses MySQL, a popular Open Source database [13], running on a Unix platform. The search engine used for indexing and searching is Glimpse [

50、14]. Net- worked resources that are selected for the Gateway database are cataloged in the Library’s Voyager catalog and the MARC catalog records are then transferred to the Gateway and augmented with authentication and

51、authorization information (if use of the resource is limited to the Cornell community). The Gateway database can be brow</p><p>　　In spite of its success the Gateway has been far from immune to the constant

52、state of flux that is typical of today’s information systems. The first major evolutionary change was the introduction of a searchable help system, with an interface organized according to user preferences [16]. The seco

53、nd was the introduction of a proxy server, used to provide access to Cornell-licensed networked resources when they are being accessed from Internet Service Providers other than the one provided by Corne</p><p

54、>　　The next evolutionary change to the Gateway resulted, once more, from problems with searching and browsing the Gateway database. By early 2001, the database contained approximately 5,000 networked resource titles (

55、a five-fold increase since its first implementation) [18]. While the database was still highly useful, retrieval sets were becoming unwieldy and confusing, largely because narrowly focused resources like the “Americans &

56、amp; Food Quiz” were retrieved alongside very broad, reference resourc</p><p>　　The second key issue is the redesign and updating of the Gateway, since it is felt that neither the Library home page nor the r

57、est of the Gateway pages reflect state-of-the-art Web design or functionality. The Library wants to update the Gateway pages by the start of the fall 2002 semester [23]. Because it is the front door to the Library—and fo

58、r some users who rarely or never visit our buildings, the Gateway is the Library—it is essential that the Gateway be appealing and easy to use. As the Ga</p><p>　　The third key issue has to do with the Libra

59、ry’s rising number of digital assets, each using different methods and metadata formats to support resource discovery and management. Despite the great strides represented by the Gateway, the Library continues to offer i

60、ts users a confusing array of digital assets and delivery systems. In other words, we need a digital library management system.</p><p>　　4.ENCompass at Cornell</p><p>　　About two years ago, the

61、Cornell University Library entered into a development partner- ship with Endeavor Information Systems, Inc. to build ENCompass [24], which is a digital library management system. Only a handful of vendors offer anything

62、comparable [25]. In addition, the University of Virginia Library has been collaborating with Cornell’s Digital Library Research Group (part of the Computer Science department) to implement FEDORA (Flexible Extensible Dig

63、ital Object Repository Architecture</p><p>　　ENCompass addresses the issues of cross-collection searching and metadata diversity. It promises a solution to managing the Library’s rising number of digital col

64、lections, each of which uses different interfaces and metadata formats to support resource discovery and management. In addition, since the collections are linked from a variety of pages deep within the Gateway’s many pa

65、ges, users cannot easily find these collections, even if they know the collections’ names.</p><p>　　In addition to its potential to offer unified access to the widely distributed, variously described digital

66、 assets that are held by the Library, an advantage of ENCompass is its support for deep searching (in other words, a searcher can be led to an appropriate collection with a very narrow search). For example, in a cross-co

67、llection searching system that permits deep searching, assuming a searcher has an interest in images of Rose-breasted Grosbeaks (a type of bird), he or she might enter the s</p><p>　　Other ENCompass developm

68、ent partners are Kansas State University, the Getty Research Library, and the University of Pennsylvania. The partners help with system design as well as suggest and test improvements. The ENCompass team at Cornell is cu

69、rrently working on three collections–a set of 10,000 digitized pamphlets from the Samuel May Anti-Slavery Collection, the E-Reference Collection, and the Library online catalog.</p><p>　　The first releases o

70、f the ENCompass software have provided support for nonproprietary data. Release 2.0, due in early 2002, is to provide support for proprietary resources–that is, commercial journal and reference databases and other e-cont

71、ent. The 2.0 release also includes support for reference linking [27]. Reference linking would allow a searcher to move from citation index entries directly to the full-text articles in the cited journals that the Librar

72、y has licensed.</p><p>　　While the Library is not yet in production with ENCompass at Cornell, the team has been working with integrating our Library catalog for cross searching with other digital collection

73、s. The metadata types are diverse–for example, the E-Reference Collection uses a locally created metadata format (based on MARC); the Anti-Slavery Collection uses TEILite; and the catalog uses MARC. Using the tools provi

74、ded by ENCompass, the team is mixing and mapping the metadata for these collections in a single in</p><p>　　5.Discussion</p><p>　　Cornell’s Gateway conforms well to the DESIRE definition of an i

75、nformation gateway. Its evolution to date has been driven by the needs to provide 24 û 7 guidance for effectively using the Gateway (the help system), to make it widely available on and off campus (the proxy server)

76、, to personalize it (MyLibrary), and to finely tune the scope of the Gateway database (the E-Reference Collection).</p><p>　　While the Gateway is primarily an information gateway organized around its owner,

77、the Cornell University Library, rather than around categories of Library users, it also has several traits of a vertical portal, most notably in the form of the personalization offered by MyLibrary and the interaction of

78、fered by the “Ask a Librarian” links. In addition, the Gateway’s numerous links to “about” information, to hours and calendars, library-affiliated Web sites, and services like ILL or course reserves</p><p>　

79、　While it offers a loose federation of a variety of Cornell-affiliated digital assets, today’s Gateway is clearly not a digital library management system. Its collection of digital assets is limited to those described in

80、 the E-Reference Collection, the Library catalog, and on numerous Web pages, all of which must be discovered and searched separately; the Gateway lacks the means to integrate diverse metadata for unified searching; and i

81、t does not support cross-collection searching or reference li</p><p>　　An emerging issue on some university campuses is the relationship between the library’s Web presence (gateway, portal, or hybrid), campu

82、s portals, and/or learning management systems. For example, some are asking what belongs on the library site and what belongs on the campus portal. This is an area to watch.</p><p>　　The best practices prese

83、nted in this paper and the Library’s experiences with its Gateway suggest that bringing order out of the chaos of Web-based resources, on behalf of a particular organization or group of users, is a resource-intensive ent

84、erprise. At the same time, it is unnecessary for every organization to build something as cost-intensive as the Library’s Gateway. Smaller quantities of resources tend to demand lower levels of technology, and there are

85、broad ranges of alternatives that ca</p><p>　　Mindful of the importance of developing what we might call today “an American knowledge base,” Thomas Jefferson said in an 1823 letter “ . . . it is the duty of

86、every good citizen to use all the opportunities, which occur to him, for preserving documents relating to the history of our country” [31]. While producing and preserving a knowledge base is fundamental, a coherent syste

87、m for discovering, accessing, and navigating such a knowledge base is equally important. This case analysis of the Corn</p><p>　　References</p><p>　　[1] DESIRE Information Gateways Handbook at h

88、ttp://www.desire.org/handbook.</p><p>　　[2] Strauss H. What is a portal, anyway? CREN (Corporation for Research, and Educational Networking) Tech Talk, January 20, 2000, at http://www.cren.net/know/techtalk/

89、events/portals.html.</p><p>　　[3] UCLA humanities web portal home page, at http://www.humnet.ucla.edu/.</p><p>　　[4] National science, mathematics, engineering, and technology education digital

90、library communication portal, at http://comm.nsdlib.org/.</p><p>　　[5] Campbell JD. The case for creating a scholars portal to the web: a white paper. Portal: libraries, and the academy 1, no. 1 (January 200

91、1), 15–21. Available at http://muse.jhu.edu/demo/pla/.</p><p>　　[6] ARL scholars working group report, May 2001, at http://www.arl.org/access/scholarsportal/ may01rept.html.</p><p>　　[7] Institu

92、te of Museum, and Library Services. A framework of guidance for building good digital collections,2001?, at http://www.imls.gov/pubs/forumframework.htm.</p><p>　　[8] Van de Sompel H, Hochstenbach P. Referenc

93、e linking in a hybrid library environment, pts. 1, and 2, D-Lib Magazine 5, no. 4 (April.), at http://www.dlib.org/dlib/april99/04contents.html, 1999.</p><p>　　[9] Caplan P. Reference linking for journal art

94、icles: promise, progress, and perils. Portal: Libraries, and the Academy 1 2001;3:351–6.</p><p>　　[10] Calhoun KS, Koltay Z, Weissman E. Library gateway: project design, teams, and cycle time. Library Resour

95、ces, and Technical Services 1999;43(2)114–22.</p><p>　　[11] Koltay Z, Calhoun, K. Designing for WOW! The optimal information gateway. In Racing toward tomorrow: proceedings of the ninth national conference o

96、f the association of college, and research libraries, April 8–11.(Chicago: ACRL). Available at http://www.ala.org/acrl/koltay.pdf, 1999.</p><p>　　[12] E-reference collection: select the link from the library

97、 gateway at http://library.cornell.edu/.</p><p>　　[13] MySQL, at http://www.mysql.com.</p><p>　　[14] Glimpse, at http://webglimpse.org/whatis.html.</p><p>　　[15] Calculated from gat