1 / 12

LTER Metadata Query Interface – Current Status and Future Challenges

LTER Metadata Query Interface – Current Status and Future Challenges. Wade Sheldon GCE-LTER. Current Metadata Query Interface: DTOC. DTOC Query Results. DTOC Dataset Links – Site IS. DTOC Strengths/Weaknesses. Strengths Familiar to LTER scientists Simple (keyword search, browse) Fast

juanitacox
Download Presentation

LTER Metadata Query Interface – Current Status and Future Challenges

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. LTER Metadata Query Interface – Current Status and Future Challenges Wade Sheldon GCE-LTER

  2. Current Metadata Query Interface: DTOC

  3. DTOC Query Results

  4. DTOC Dataset Links – Site IS

  5. DTOC Strengths/Weaknesses • Strengths • Familiar to LTER scientists • Simple (keyword search, browse) • Fast • Populated by all LTER Sites • Weaknesses • Limited search parameters • Limited metadata content to search • Can’t tailor results (sort, filter, search within results) • Targets of document links highly variable (Site pages) • No scope for enhancement

  6. KNB Metacat Web Query Interface

  7. KNB Metacat Constrained Search

  8. KNB Metacat Search Results

  9. KNB Metacat Data Set Metadata Display

  10. KNB Metacat Data Entity Metadata Display

  11. KNB Metacat Strengths/Weaknesses • Strengths • Simple interface with keyword guidance • Searches rich metadata content (EML content) • Some constrained search support (title, author, all) • Consistent display for all documents • Highly configurable • Weaknesses (of default web interface, stylesheets) • Limited search parameters • Can’t tailor results (sort, page, filter) • Expansive displays of query results, metadata hard to view • Links to entities, data “buried” • Relatively slow

  12. Ideal LTER Metadata Query Interface • Subject of working group (shameless plug) • Some considerations: • Needs to be PI-friendly (usability is key) • Should be flexible • support multiple interfaces (search, browse, query builder) • results should be customizable (user-selectable detail) • ideally should support multiple database targets • Should be results-oriented • links to resources described should be highly prominent(“where’s the *&!# data!”)

More Related