![]() |
NewsML | Table of contents | Indexes | Metadata Workflows | ![]() |
|||
Metadata ![]() | PRISM |
| e-commerce through metadata |
Burman, Linda ![]() |
| Linda Burman |
| President |
Canada ![]() L. A. Burman Associates ![]() Ontario ![]() Toronto ![]() | L. A. Burman Associates,
Co-Chair, PRISM Working Group,
23 Hambly Ave., Suite 300 Toronto Ontario M4E 2R5 Canada Phone: 416.699.7198 Fax: 416.699.1178 email: linda@laburman.com web site: www.laburman.com |
| Biography |
| Abstract |
| PRISM | PRISM: metadata to improve the bottom line |
Rationale for joining the Working Group: The Biz Problems |
| The hopes of resolving at least some of these barriers were the drivers that brought the PRISM Working Group members together. |
Goals |
| Initial Primary Goal: to develop an XML metadata vocabulary by mid 2000 specifically for the magazine, catalogue, mainstream journal, news and book industries. |
The Working Group |
|
Timelines |
| The aggressive milestones that the group established called for the release of a specification by mid 2000. At the time of writing, the work is on track to produce the first version of the specification in that timeframe. |
PRISM’s Progress |
Background |
| The Working Group began meeting in June 1999 and has continued to meet every month since then - although some meetings involve only subcommittees. |
| Creating a new standard is an exciting but challenging activity, especially in a space that is already inhabited by other specifications, all of which need to be examined, understood, leveraged and/or referenced. Thus the Working Group proceeded in two directions, initially. The Group decided that the requirements document would be a set of very specific “use case” scenarios describing business problems that content providers need to solve. These scenarios have proved extremely useful for determining scope and actual vocabulary requirements. As new content providers join the Group, they provide additional scenarios to ensure that the group is creating the ‘right” vocabulary. |
| The Group researched and analyzed existing standards and initiatives to determine which aspects were not being addressed. The Group’s specific goal was to avoid “re-inventing the wheel” - to make use of existing specifications where possible. A secondary goal was publish a catalogue describing existing specifications and how they relate to PRISM. |
| During this research phase it became evident that some of PRISM’s interests coincided with those of the IPTC, who had developed NITF (News Industry Text Format) and were in the process of developing NewsML. Thus a collaborative relationship was crafted and representatives from each group have been attending the other group’s meetings since January. The IPTC has already developed some aspects of metadata that are very valuable to PRISM. But the IPTC’s work is not as focused on component and general relationships, rights and permissions and other requirements that are more specific to magazines and catalogues. |
Getting the work done |
| PRISM is using a supply chain framework to delineate various aspects of required metadata. Objects consisting of any/all media type(s) are captured and maybe archived, and then “passed” to another process for manipulation and aggregation into a compound object, such as a magazine article. The compound objects are then delivered to multiple media in multiple formats. They may then be re-stored as individual components or passed outside the enterprise as compound objects for aggregation, syndication, re-use and retrieval by another business and/or by consumers. Post processing may occur at any step. Metadata to facilitate these processes with the exception, probably, of delivery, are the concerns of PRISM. Metadata to manage content objects, to describe their rights and permissions and the relationships between and among them, is also the concern of PRISM. |
| The Working Group is developing a framework for the metadata vocabulary and expects to use RDF to describe the relationships of components. The Group has formed subcommittees devoted to each aspect described above. Subcommittee work is reviewed by the whole Working Group. PRISM requires consensus on all decisions. |
Achievements |
| In February 2000, at theSeybold Seminars Conference in Boston, the Group presented an interoperability demo of a scenario involving seven software tools exchanging and operating on content tagged with PRISM metadata. The admiring audience was struck by the applicability of the technology demonstration to the issues they struggle with on a daily basis. The demonstration was repeated atXTech in San Jose later that month - again receiving very positive responses. |
| At the time of writing work has proceeded on both vocabulary descriptions and framework definitions such that the Working Group expects to release version 1.0 of the specification in the June timeframe. |
| In the exhibition area at this conference (XMLEurope 2000 ), the PRISM Working Group members are demonstrating collaborations between content providers and software tool makers using PRISM metadata. |
Summary |
| In summary, it is clear that the industry needs a standard metadata vocabulary to realize the potential of online publishing and e-commerce in the publishing industry. PRISM provides a framework for the interchange and preservation of content and metadata. PRISM also provides a set of controlled vocabularies with which to describe the content being interchanged. Thus PRISM will provide a common interchange that greatly expands the market for licensed content. |
| Acknowledgements |
| The author wishes to thank the members of the PRISM Working Group for ongoing dedication to the specification and in particular, Deren Hansen of Wavo Corporation for his fine work as editor of the specification and Ron Daniel of Metacode Technologies for his leadership as co-chair of the Working Group. |
![]() |
NewsML | Table of contents | Indexes | Metadata Workflows | ![]() | |||