Entity Relationship Model (wikipedia)
We covered entity relationship models last semester in LIS 2005, Understanding Information. This article was a good refresher about conceptual databases and conceptual modelling. I remember the different pieces (or shapes, if you will) with the ideas also suggested in the reading. Specifically, that "entities" mimic "nouns," "relationships" mimic "verbs," and finally, that "attributes" are "descriptors."
While reading this article, I was struck with the idea that most of these conceptual models, like the entity relationship model, are used at the beginning of a process, before a database even exists. The idea is that it's a sketch, to see how things could possibly relate. I'm curious about the way that bottom up design would work in an entity relationship model, particularly in something like social tagging or a folksonomy. There, the relationshp are somewhat arbitrary, or at least harder to pin down because they are derivative of what many individuals thought about the "entities" in question. I wonder if there have been any parallels between user created systems and established database systems of organizations? I think it could be a fascinating project to make organizational sense out of the "system" of others, especially if that system was able to grow and expand.
The limits of creating a bottom up conceptual model, I guess, are that it would be outdated the moment someone added a new entity, attribute, or relationship to the organizational scheme on which the conceptual model was based.
Still, it's worth a thought!
Database Normalization
Normal forms of database information and the relationship created between entities looks like a precise art. Looking at the first tables of invoices, I could make sense of what the information was and what it was trying to convey. Each normal form made it a little clearer while also more confusing. At the end of the reading, when the parts were broken into clearly delineated entities and relationships, it seemed so clear that the representation of different parts was the way that the invoice information should be organized. I don't think I would have gotten to that stage on my own. As it was, I had to read and re-read the information several times to make sense of it.
I think the concatenated primary forms are the most difficult to make sure that there is no overlap, and that they are not violating the second normal form. It was also interesting to look at the differences between how the normalizing process stripped away a recognizable system of organizing information, like an invoice, into very distinct parts. I think it will take some practice to be able to think with the normal forms.
Database (wikipedia)
I feel like databases are as ubiquitous in our lives as the air we breathe. The gist that I'm getting from our readings and classwork is that databases, management, and creation are the underpinnings of 21st century western civilization. There are so many parts and pieces that compose a database, however, that sometimes it's challenging to really wrap my head around what's what. I think it's also sometimes challenging for me to understand the nuances of different parts because my brain has yet to fully absorb the information and create new manners of thinking and understanding. I traditionally have been very people oriented, working more with groups and individuals in real time, and less with abstract concepts and data. Once I make the connections and proper correlations, I am sure that I will have a better grasp, but I don't think I transcend my role as an end user. I will have a better appreciation for the developers, administrators, and for the often unnoticed presence of databases in every day life.
Sunday, January 29, 2012
Saturday, January 28, 2012
Saturday, January 21, 2012
Reading Notes: Week 3
Introduction to Metadata: Setting the Stage, by Anne J. Gilliland
I appreciate the thoroughness of this chapter. I am a relative novice to metadata as a formal concept, having been introduced to it briefly last semester. In reality, however, metadata is all around us and is something that I use on a regular basis, both knowingly and unconsciously.
A line from the end of the article: "metadata is like interest: it accrues over time" was significant because it stresses the duality of metadata. It is both dynamic and static at the same time. Part of the importance of metadata is the notion that it can change over time as elements are added and expanded, but also remains a constant set of descriptors about an information object.
The list of primary functions of metadata was very helpful in clarifying my understanding of what metadata really IS, beyond the pat definition that metadata is "information about information." The expanded list of functions emphasized the essential nature of metadata, and why it is important for me to understand and be familiar with metadata. Sometimes I feel like I live a life that is a few steps away from the things I use on an daily basis. For example, I drive my car without working knowledge of how exactly it works. Understanding metadata on a conceptual basis - and a practical one - is like getting under the hood of information science and beginning to understand the way the parts and pieces really fit together.
The breakdown of data structure standards into data value standards to data content standards into data format/technical interchange standards shed some light on the Dublin Core Article. I was finally able to put Dublin Core into an understandable context within a metadata framework. Likening data structure to a big container into which items go - following specific rules - made Dublin Core make a little more sense.
An Overview of the Dublin Core Data Model, by Eric J. Miller
As the Setting the Stage article pointed out, a complete metadata picture of an information object is essential to it's proper use, storage, and longevity. Understanding that DCMI has created the DCES to be a simple, comprehensive, and interdisciplinary set of metadata elements as a way to make information more readily accessible is fantastic! These generic standards - combined with subject or institution specific standards - will go a long way in creating a universally accessible world of information.
While I have some grasp on the theory of what Dublin Core is trying to do and what it offers, I don't yet understand how it actually works in practice. I found the article to be confusing as it broke down different parts. However, I am hopeful that with more reading and next week's lecture I will understand it better.
EndNote X5: An Introduction
Last semester I attempted to use RefWorks as an "easier" option while writing a paper for LIS 2000: Understanding Information. I found myself spending an inordinate amount of time trying to add information and produce correct in-text citations and a works cited page. It was actually far easier to to manually add citations and type the works cited page. Part of this is because I kept a detailed record as I worked of the bibliographic information that I needed.
My fear with EndNote and other online bibliographic services that it has a large possibility for user error by way of neglect. I meticulously check - as I type - the bibliographic information that goes into my work. However, I am willing to give this service a chance because of the implications for the way I could use it in the future as a teaching tool.
SOPA and other conversations happening in the United States could be a bellwether for changes in the internet and ways that we use and access information. If web-based resources like EndNote and RefWorks offer an easier and potential more intuitive way to cite copyrighted materials, perhaps digital natives and other users inclined to piracy - intentional or not -will be more likely to properly attribute content in their created works. I know that this dream is a long shot, but it is a cultural shift that needs to happen, not a legislative one in order to stop online piracy.
I appreciate the thoroughness of this chapter. I am a relative novice to metadata as a formal concept, having been introduced to it briefly last semester. In reality, however, metadata is all around us and is something that I use on a regular basis, both knowingly and unconsciously.
A line from the end of the article: "metadata is like interest: it accrues over time" was significant because it stresses the duality of metadata. It is both dynamic and static at the same time. Part of the importance of metadata is the notion that it can change over time as elements are added and expanded, but also remains a constant set of descriptors about an information object.
The list of primary functions of metadata was very helpful in clarifying my understanding of what metadata really IS, beyond the pat definition that metadata is "information about information." The expanded list of functions emphasized the essential nature of metadata, and why it is important for me to understand and be familiar with metadata. Sometimes I feel like I live a life that is a few steps away from the things I use on an daily basis. For example, I drive my car without working knowledge of how exactly it works. Understanding metadata on a conceptual basis - and a practical one - is like getting under the hood of information science and beginning to understand the way the parts and pieces really fit together.
The breakdown of data structure standards into data value standards to data content standards into data format/technical interchange standards shed some light on the Dublin Core Article. I was finally able to put Dublin Core into an understandable context within a metadata framework. Likening data structure to a big container into which items go - following specific rules - made Dublin Core make a little more sense.
An Overview of the Dublin Core Data Model, by Eric J. Miller
As the Setting the Stage article pointed out, a complete metadata picture of an information object is essential to it's proper use, storage, and longevity. Understanding that DCMI has created the DCES to be a simple, comprehensive, and interdisciplinary set of metadata elements as a way to make information more readily accessible is fantastic! These generic standards - combined with subject or institution specific standards - will go a long way in creating a universally accessible world of information.
While I have some grasp on the theory of what Dublin Core is trying to do and what it offers, I don't yet understand how it actually works in practice. I found the article to be confusing as it broke down different parts. However, I am hopeful that with more reading and next week's lecture I will understand it better.
EndNote X5: An Introduction
Last semester I attempted to use RefWorks as an "easier" option while writing a paper for LIS 2000: Understanding Information. I found myself spending an inordinate amount of time trying to add information and produce correct in-text citations and a works cited page. It was actually far easier to to manually add citations and type the works cited page. Part of this is because I kept a detailed record as I worked of the bibliographic information that I needed.
My fear with EndNote and other online bibliographic services that it has a large possibility for user error by way of neglect. I meticulously check - as I type - the bibliographic information that goes into my work. However, I am willing to give this service a chance because of the implications for the way I could use it in the future as a teaching tool.
SOPA and other conversations happening in the United States could be a bellwether for changes in the internet and ways that we use and access information. If web-based resources like EndNote and RefWorks offer an easier and potential more intuitive way to cite copyrighted materials, perhaps digital natives and other users inclined to piracy - intentional or not -will be more likely to properly attribute content in their created works. I know that this dream is a long shot, but it is a cultural shift that needs to happen, not a legislative one in order to stop online piracy.
Friday, January 20, 2012
LAB 2
Annotated Screen Capture:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/hdickerson/6728369733/in/photostream/
How to use Supercook.com Tutorial:
http://screencast.com/t/SffrfdZ8
http://www.flickr.com/photos/hdickerson/6728369733/in/photostream/
How to use Supercook.com Tutorial:
http://screencast.com/t/SffrfdZ8
Saturday, January 14, 2012
Week 2 Reading Notes
I appreciated the mix of informational computer hardware and processes content and a more sociological approach to the topics of digital content.
Computer Hardware (Wikipedia article)
Reading this article was a refresher into the different parts of a computer. While I am not a computer expert, I have grown up constantly learning new things about computers. I was familiar with most of the terms and their functions. Also thought back to the computer connection to many of the things that we are learning about information science and libraries. We are inextricably linked to Babbage and Shannon!
The article also reminded me that what I think of as a "computer," my mental image if you will, is really only a small fragment or portion of the types of computers available and used worldwide. I have yet to see a mainframe computer, but would love to! Computers exists on a spectrum all around us.
Data Compression (Wikipedia article)
This idea is a semi-new topic for me. Obviously I interact with different types of compressed data on a constant basis; I just never think about how it gets from one place (or form) to another. I think perhaps more people would benefit from increased awareness about exactly HOW their Hulu video streams, or what the trade offs are between buying an mp3 on iTunes versus spending slightly more for an audio CD.
Lossy audio compression made me think about what the process of stripping away inconsequential or minute parts of data that may or may not be heard could mean for culture. Is there a potential to begin stripping away other seemingly unnecessary parts or portions of created materials? If so, is this good or bad? We tend toward excess, so could this have implications for being beneficial, or could it eventually cause us to loose very important content because we are not aware that the little things matter?
Digitization: Is it Worth it? (Stuart D. Lee)
Lee mentioned in his article that one of the reasons for digitization is the ability to offer increased access of materials. In the LIS program, we constantly talk about access, so I wonder what it really means to offer increased access to particular materials? Who actually benefits from the digitization of rare books and manuscripts, or of increased e-content? Will it increase the possibilities of serendipitous discoveries? I hope so, but I also wonder if the increased access causes a decrease in other essential services.
I strongly agree with Lee's statement that all cases of digitization should be treated differently. There is not a universal answer to whether or not something should be digitized; rather, the process of digitizing materials is an ongoing one and should reflect changes and updates in technologies. My sincere hope is that converted materials will be protected and converted with as much care for their content and for the experience of a physical artifact is possible. Baker's book Double Fold cautions against the destruction of materials once they have been digitized, and I also hope that when possible, room can be kept/made/saved for precious printed materials.
European Libraries Face Problems in Digitalizing (Doreen Carvajal)
Upon finishing this article, I immediately went to the European Libraries website and explored. I did have some of the serendipitous moments of discovery that I love about libraries. I looked at some very interesting old manuscripts and maps, and explored the 1930's car trip!
As discussed in the Lee article, there are always tradeoffs between digitizing and analog materials. I wonder what the trade-off's are between having corporate sponsorship of a national program? What are the implications of the public and private alliances in their digitization project? In similar projects, what will corporate sponsors expect in return, especially one like Google? There was a quote at the end of the article stating "I would never think about not talking with Google." I think we must really examine the Googlification of our lives; at what point is it possible for Google to become an Orwellian Big Brother? I'm not such a Debbie Downer most of the time, but when I think about the power that Google has - power that WE have given them - sometimes I get frightened!
On a more uplifting note, I did notice on the European Libraries website that UNESCO has endorsed the IFLA Manifesto for digital libraries as a way to bridge the digital divide!
Computer Hardware (Wikipedia article)
Reading this article was a refresher into the different parts of a computer. While I am not a computer expert, I have grown up constantly learning new things about computers. I was familiar with most of the terms and their functions. Also thought back to the computer connection to many of the things that we are learning about information science and libraries. We are inextricably linked to Babbage and Shannon!
The article also reminded me that what I think of as a "computer," my mental image if you will, is really only a small fragment or portion of the types of computers available and used worldwide. I have yet to see a mainframe computer, but would love to! Computers exists on a spectrum all around us.
Data Compression (Wikipedia article)
This idea is a semi-new topic for me. Obviously I interact with different types of compressed data on a constant basis; I just never think about how it gets from one place (or form) to another. I think perhaps more people would benefit from increased awareness about exactly HOW their Hulu video streams, or what the trade offs are between buying an mp3 on iTunes versus spending slightly more for an audio CD.
Lossy audio compression made me think about what the process of stripping away inconsequential or minute parts of data that may or may not be heard could mean for culture. Is there a potential to begin stripping away other seemingly unnecessary parts or portions of created materials? If so, is this good or bad? We tend toward excess, so could this have implications for being beneficial, or could it eventually cause us to loose very important content because we are not aware that the little things matter?
Digitization: Is it Worth it? (Stuart D. Lee)
Lee mentioned in his article that one of the reasons for digitization is the ability to offer increased access of materials. In the LIS program, we constantly talk about access, so I wonder what it really means to offer increased access to particular materials? Who actually benefits from the digitization of rare books and manuscripts, or of increased e-content? Will it increase the possibilities of serendipitous discoveries? I hope so, but I also wonder if the increased access causes a decrease in other essential services.
I strongly agree with Lee's statement that all cases of digitization should be treated differently. There is not a universal answer to whether or not something should be digitized; rather, the process of digitizing materials is an ongoing one and should reflect changes and updates in technologies. My sincere hope is that converted materials will be protected and converted with as much care for their content and for the experience of a physical artifact is possible. Baker's book Double Fold cautions against the destruction of materials once they have been digitized, and I also hope that when possible, room can be kept/made/saved for precious printed materials.
European Libraries Face Problems in Digitalizing (Doreen Carvajal)
Upon finishing this article, I immediately went to the European Libraries website and explored. I did have some of the serendipitous moments of discovery that I love about libraries. I looked at some very interesting old manuscripts and maps, and explored the 1930's car trip!
As discussed in the Lee article, there are always tradeoffs between digitizing and analog materials. I wonder what the trade-off's are between having corporate sponsorship of a national program? What are the implications of the public and private alliances in their digitization project? In similar projects, what will corporate sponsors expect in return, especially one like Google? There was a quote at the end of the article stating "I would never think about not talking with Google." I think we must really examine the Googlification of our lives; at what point is it possible for Google to become an Orwellian Big Brother? I'm not such a Debbie Downer most of the time, but when I think about the power that Google has - power that WE have given them - sometimes I get frightened!
On a more uplifting note, I did notice on the European Libraries website that UNESCO has endorsed the IFLA Manifesto for digital libraries as a way to bridge the digital divide!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)