Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
The ‘discovery to delivery’ DLF reference model
The ‘discovery to delivery’ DLF reference model
The ‘discovery to delivery’ DLF reference model
The ‘discovery to delivery’ DLF reference model
The ‘discovery to delivery’ DLF reference model
The ‘discovery to delivery’ DLF reference model
The ‘discovery to delivery’ DLF reference model
The ‘discovery to delivery’ DLF reference model
The ‘discovery to delivery’ DLF reference model
The ‘discovery to delivery’ DLF reference model
The ‘discovery to delivery’ DLF reference model
The ‘discovery to delivery’ DLF reference model
The ‘discovery to delivery’ DLF reference model
The ‘discovery to delivery’ DLF reference model
The ‘discovery to delivery’ DLF reference model
The ‘discovery to delivery’ DLF reference model
The ‘discovery to delivery’ DLF reference model
The ‘discovery to delivery’ DLF reference model
The ‘discovery to delivery’ DLF reference model
The ‘discovery to delivery’ DLF reference model
The ‘discovery to delivery’ DLF reference model
The ‘discovery to delivery’ DLF reference model
The ‘discovery to delivery’ DLF reference model
The ‘discovery to delivery’ DLF reference model
The ‘discovery to delivery’ DLF reference model
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

The ‘discovery to delivery’ DLF reference model

1,816

Published on

A presentation at the JISC-CETIS Conference, Edinburgh, November 2005

A presentation at the JISC-CETIS Conference, Edinburgh, November 2005

Published in: Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
1,816
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
10
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. UKOLN is supported by: The ‘discovery to delivery’ DLF reference model Andy Powell, UKOLN, University of Bath [email_address] JISC-CETIS Conference, Edinburgh, November 2005 www.bath.ac.uk a centre of expertise in digital information management www.ukoln.ac.uk
  • 2. Contents <ul><li>this talk summarises some draft work that has been done as part of the DLF Abstract Service Framework Working Group to develop a ‘reference model’ for the ‘discovery to delivery’ space </li></ul><ul><ul><li>history – the IE </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>context - the DLF Abstract Service Framework Working Group </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>terminology – the DLF model and ‘reference model’ </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>the d2d reference model </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>issues </li></ul></ul>
  • 3. History - the JISC IE <ul><li>attempt to allow services offered within the JISC community to be joined together more seamlessly </li></ul><ul><ul><li>JISC-funded, institutional, other </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>allow users to ‘discover’, ‘access’ and ‘use’ resources – d2d </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>not just library resources – wide range of heterogeneous resources </li></ul></ul><ul><li>a set of standards/interfaces </li></ul><ul><li>essentially ‘service oriented’ but work pre-dated that use of terminology </li></ul>
  • 4. Context – the DLF <ul><li>Digital Library Federation – consortium of largely US research libraries but growing international membership – e.g. the British Library </li></ul><ul><li>DLF Abstract Service Framework Working Group - applying a ‘service oriented’ approach to library services </li></ul><ul><ul><li>see how library services fit into world populated by Google, Amazon, eLearning systems, Grid services and eResearch, Web 2.0, etc. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>unbundle monolithic library systems into ‘service’ components </li></ul></ul>
  • 5. BIG DISCLAIMER <ul><li>everything I’m about to tell you may be wrong! </li></ul><ul><li>this presentation discusses work that is currently in progress </li></ul><ul><li>the terminology may well change (in fact it is already changing) </li></ul><ul><li>the use of the DLF model for things like d2d may well change (in fact it is already changing) </li></ul><ul><li>DLF keen to work with JISC on the eFramework to reach consensus </li></ul>
  • 6. Terminology - the DLF model Business requirement Business process Business function Abstract service Service binding Deployed service Business entity
  • 7. Terminology - the DLF model Business requirement Business process Business function Abstract service Service binding Deployed service A business requirement is identifiable segment of an organisation’s overall mission. A business process is an identifiable portion of a business requirement. Business processes may be made up of business functions .
  • 8. Terminology - the DLF model Business requirement Business process Business function Abstract service Service binding Deployed service A bstract services are discrete pieces of networked functionality (supporting a business process/function). A service binding is an instantiation of an abstract service – a concrete data representation, API, Web service description, etc.
  • 9. Terminology - the DLF model Business requirement Business process Business function Abstract service Service binding Deployed service A deployed service is a service binding available at a specific location on the network. Business entity
  • 10. Terminology - the DLF model Business requirement Business process Business function Abstract service Service binding Deployed service A business entity is something of interest – typically represented by metadata. The things that services are about. Business entity
  • 11. DLF reference model <ul><li>a DLF reference model is… </li></ul><ul><li>a document that describes all the features of this model as used to meet a particular business requirement </li></ul><ul><li>not clear how formalised this document can/should be? </li></ul><ul><ul><li>human text vs. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>UML (or some other modelling language) </li></ul></ul>
  • 12. Applying the DLF model… <ul><li>…to the discovery to delivery (d2d) ‘business requirement’ </li></ul><ul><ul><li>the requirement for people to be able to discover and access resources in the context of their learning and/or research activities </li></ul></ul><ul><li>in this case the requirement is met by allowing the end-user to undertake a number of ‘business functions’ </li></ul><ul><ul><li>enter, survey, discover, detail, request, deliver </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>each function is documented using UML use cases </li></ul></ul>
  • 13. Enter <ul><li>entering the ‘system’ </li></ul><ul><li>likely to have to be authenticated before accessing resources </li></ul><ul><ul><li>e.g. providing an Athens username </li></ul></ul><ul><li>may result in a personalised view of the landscape being presented </li></ul>enter authenticate buildLandscape initiate user provider
  • 14. Survey/discover <ul><li>'survey‘ is about identifying the collections that are of interest </li></ul><ul><li>'discover' drills down into each of the collections identified during the initial survey </li></ul><ul><li>same ‘discovery’ strategies used in each </li></ul>discover initiate user provider survey useSavedRecord search initiate useSavedRecord search browse alert initiate assistQuery assistQuery browse alert initiate
  • 15. Detail <ul><li>builds up knowledge about a particular resource </li></ul><ul><ul><li>locations, formats, ratings and annotations, terms and conditions, etc. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>find out enough to be able to request the resource </li></ul>detail locate getFormats initiate user provider getRatings getConditions
  • 16. Request/deliver <ul><li>attempt to obtain resource </li></ul><ul><ul><li>HTTP GET </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>inter-library loan </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>buying book from Amazon </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>etc. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>some level of authorisation may be required before delivery </li></ul>request deliver authorise initiate initiate initiate user provider
  • 17. Abstract services <ul><li>business functions and processes supported by services </li></ul>Enter Survey Discover Detail Deliver Request JISC IE D2D Authentic- ation User Preferences Service Registry Search Alert Terminology Metadata Schema Registry Harvest Identifier Resolver Rating/ Annotation Link Server Terms and Conditions Authorisation Authorisation Authorisation Terminology Business Requirement Business Process Abstract Service
  • 18. Abstract services <ul><li>each abstract service documented in terms of its behaviour, inputs, outputs and intelligence (the business entities it needs to know about) </li></ul><ul><li>for example: </li></ul><ul><li>Search (Discover) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Behavior: Accepts a structured query and issues a set of metadata records (a result set) in response to the query. Intelligence: Schema Data in: Structured query Data out: Metadata record set </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Link server (Detail) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Behavior: Provides information and/or links (i.e. URLs) associated with a resource based on a metadata record about that resource. Intelligence: Data in: Metadata record Data out: Information and links </li></ul></ul>
  • 19. Service bindings <ul><li>each abstract service instantiated using one or more service bindings </li></ul><ul><li>for example: </li></ul><ul><li>Search </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Z39.50 (Bath Profile) SRW/SRU </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>DC, IEEE LOM </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>METS, IMS-CP, MPEG-21 DIDL </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Link server </li></ul><ul><ul><li>OpenURL </li></ul></ul>
  • 20. Deployed services <ul><li>the set of service bindings deployed on the network </li></ul>JISC-funded content providers institutional content providers external content providers brokers aggregators catalogues indexes institutional portals subject portals learning management systems media-specific portals end-user desktop/browser presentation fusion provision OpenURL link servers shared infrastructure authentication/authorisation (Athens) institutional profiling services terminology services service registries identifier services metadata schema registries © Andy Powell (UKOLN, University of Bath), 2005
  • 21. Issues - workflow <ul><li>UML use-cases as presented here tend to imply a linear workflow </li></ul><ul><ul><li>enter, survey, discovery, detail, request, delivery </li></ul></ul><ul><li>in practice, services likely to be joined together by end-users in arbitrary order as they see fit </li></ul><ul><li>not possible to pre-determine workflow used in the wild?! </li></ul>survey/ discover useRecord detail request deliver useResource
  • 22. Issues – enter function <ul><li>‘ enter’ function OK if thinking about monolithic resource discovery application, e.g. a ‘portal’ </li></ul><ul><li>but doesn’t sit comfortably in scenario where end-user is joining services together to suit them </li></ul><ul><li>authentication, authorisation, user-profiling likely to happen at multiple places in workflow </li></ul><ul><ul><li>e.g. consider user moving from Google to Connotea to OpenURL link server to library OPAC to A&I service to lngenta Journals … </li></ul></ul>
  • 23. Issues – survey vs. discover <ul><li>this work is draft and undergoing inactive change </li></ul><ul><li>not clear that this is the right breakdown of ‘business functions’ </li></ul><ul><li>‘survey’ vs. ‘discover’ distinction not clear – particularly since same strategies might be used to find ‘annotations’, ‘terms and conditions’, etc. </li></ul>
  • 24. Issues – use of UML <ul><li>not building monolithic applications </li></ul><ul><li>rather, we are building loosely-coupled services that will be joined together and choreographed by a variety of applications </li></ul><ul><li>use of UML in this context is somewhat ‘unusual’ </li></ul><ul><li>might be better to use other approaches instead of/as well as UML </li></ul><ul><ul><li>e.g. Mindmaps </li></ul></ul>
  • 25. Discussion…

×
http://www.slideshare.net/andypowe11/the-discovery-to-delivery-dlf-reference-model
www.slideshare.net
crawl=CC-MAIN-2015-27
158972
application/http; msgtype=response
sha1:OTNP6OERLJ6I7QOPZAMDONWABWNYGOOB
<urn:uuid:c391121d-a2c4-41ff-9513-e752b5aed109>
2015-07-06T06:14:20Z
108.174.2.138
sha1:6UVMHAZH65AXRCBSJQVPVCIII4RO4ATP
<urn:uuid:366b76b2-8266-4f89-9ca1-26483b381bfa>
http://www.slideshare.net/andypowe11/the-discovery-to-delivery-dlf-reference-model
length
response
<urn:uuid:b257634e-c8a0-44b4-b403-3730b67d087c>
robots: classic
hostname: ip-10-179-60-89.ec2.internal
software: Nutch 1.6 (CC)/CC WarcExport 1.0
isPartOf: CC-MAIN-2015-27
operator: CommonCrawl Admin
description: Wide crawl of the web for June 2015
publisher: CommonCrawl
format: WARC File Format 1.0
conformsTo: http://bibnum.bnf.fr/WARC/WARC_ISO_28500_version1_latestdraft.pdf