Handling Hierarchically Structured Resources Addressing Interoperability Issues in Digital Libraries

Part of the Studies in Computational Intelligence book series (SCI, volume 375)


We present and describe the NEsted SeTs for Object hieRarchies (NESTOR) Framework that allows us to model, manage, access and exchange hierarchically structured resources.We envision this framework in the context of Digital Libraries and using it as a mean to address the complex and multiform concept of interoperability when dealing with hierarchical structures. The NESTOR Framework is based on three main components: The Model, the Algebra and a Prototype.We detail all these components and present a concrete use case based on archives that are collections of historical documents or records providing information about a place, institution, or group of people, because the archives are fundamental and challenging entities in the digital libraries panorama. Within the archives we show how an archive can be represented through set data models and how these models can be instantiated. We compare two instantiations of the NESTOR Model and show how interoperability issues can be addressed by exploiting the NESTOR Framework.


Digital Library Nestor Model Relational Algebra Tree Data Structure Nestor Algebra 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Agosti, M., Ferro, N., Silvello, G.: Access and Exchange of Hierarchically Structured Resources on the Web with the NESTOR Framework. In: IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference Web Intelligence and Intelligent Agent Technology, pp. 659–662 (2009)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Agosti, M., Ferro, N., Silvello, G.: The NESTOR Framework: Manage, Access and Exchange Hierarchical data Structures. In: Proceedings of the 18th Italian Symposium on Advanced Database Systems, Società Editrice Esculapio, Bologna, Italy, pp. 242–253 (2010)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Anderson, K.W., Hall, D.W.: Sets, Sequences, and Mappings: The Basic Concepts of Analysis. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York (1963)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bender, M.A., Farach-Colton, M., Pemmasani, G., Skiena, S., Sumazin, P.: Lowest Common Ancestors in Trees and Directed Acyclic Graphs. J. Algorithms 57, 75–94 (2005)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Celko, J.: Joe Celko’s SQL for Smarties: Advanced SQL Programming. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (2000)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Codd, E.F.: A Relational Data Model of Data for Large Shared Data Banks. Communications of the ACM 13(6), 377–387 (1970)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Codd, E.F.: Relational Completeness of Data Base Sublanguages. In: Rustin, R. (ed.) Database Systems, pp. 65–98 (1972)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cook, T.: The Concept of Archival Fonds and the Post-Custodial Era: Theory, Problems and Solutions. Archiviaria 35, 24–37 (1993)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Crestani, F., Vegas, J., de la Fuente, P.: A Graphical User Interface for the Retrieval of Hierarchically Structured Documents. Inf. Process. Management 40(2), 269–289 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Duranti, L.: Diplomatics: New Uses for an Old Science. Society of American Archivists and Association of Canadian Archivists in association with Scarecrow Press (1998)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ferro, N., Silvello, G.: The NESTOR framework: How to handle hierarchical data structures. In: Agosti, M., Borbinha, J., Kapidakis, S., Papatheodorou, C., Tsakonas, G. (eds.) ECDL 2009. LNCS, vol. 5714, pp. 215–226. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gilliland-Swetland, A.J.: Enduring Paradigm, New Opportunities: The Value of the Archival Perspective in the Digital Environment. Council on Library and Information Resources (2000)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gradmann, S.: Interoperability of Digital Libraries: Report on the work of the EC working group on DL interoperability. In: Seminar on Disclosure and Preservation: Fostering European Culture in The Digital Landscape, National Library of Portugal, Directorate-General of the Portuguese Archives, Lisbon, Portugal (2007)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Halmos, P.R.: Naive Set Theory. D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc., New York (1960)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    International Council on Archives. ISAD(G): General International Standard Archival Description, 2nd edn. International Council on Archives, Ottawa (1999)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jagadish, H.V., Lakshmanan, L.V.S., Srivastava, D., Thompson, K.: TAX: A tree algebra for XML. In: Ghelli, G., Grahne, G. (eds.) DBPL 2001. LNCS, vol. 2397, pp. 149–164. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kiesling, K.: Metadata, Metadata, Everywhere - But Where Is the Hook? OCLC Systems & Services 17(2), 84–88 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kim, J.: EAD Encoding and Display: A Content Analysis. Journal of Archival Organization 2(3), 41–55 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Knuth, D.E.: The Art of Computer Programming, 3rd edn., vol. 1. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1997)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Levergood, B., Farrenkopf, S., Frasnelli, E.: The Specification of the Language of the Field and Interoperability: Cross-Language Access to Catalogues and Online Libraries (CACAO). In: Greenberg, J., Klasore, W. (eds.) DC 2008, Proc. of the Int’l Conf. on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications 2008, pp. 191–196. Universitätsverlag Göttingen, Germany (2008)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    MacNeil, H., Wei, C., Duranti, L., Gilliland-Swetland, A., Guercio, M., Hackett, Y., Hamidzadeh, B., Iacovino, L., Lee, B., McKemmish, S., Roeder, J., Ross, S., Wan, W., Zhon Xiu, Z.: Authenticity Task Force Report. InterPARES Project: Vancouver, Canada (2001)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Paparizos, S., Jagadish, H.V.: The importance of algebra for XML query processing. In: Grust, T., Höpfner, H., Illarramendi, A., Jablonski, S., Fischer, F., Müller, S., Patranjan, P.-L., Sattler, K.-U., Spiliopoulou, M., Wijsen, J. (eds.) EDBT 2006. LNCS, vol. 4254, pp. 126–135. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Pearce-Moses, R.: Glossary of Archival And Records Terminology. Society of American Archivists (2005)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Pitti, D.V.: Encoded Archival Description. An Introduction and Overview. D-Lib Magazine 5(11) (1999)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Prom, C.J.: Does EAD Play Well with Other Metadata Standards? Searching and Retrieving EAD Using the OAI Protocols. Journal of Archival Organization 1(3), 51–72 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Prom, C.J., Rishel, C.A., Schwartz, S.W., Fox, K.J.: A Unified Platform for Archival Description and Access. In: Rasmussen, E.M., Larson, R.R., Toms, E., Sugimoto, S. (eds.) Proc. 7th ACM/IEEE Joint Conference on Digital Libraries (JCDL 2007), pp. 157–166. ACM Press, New York (2007)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Rys, M., Chamberlin, D.D., Florescu, D.: XML and Relational Database Management Systems: The Inside Story. In: Özcan, F. (ed.) Proc. of the ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data (SIGMOD 2005), pp. 945–947. ACM Press, New York (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Shreeves, S.L., Kaczmarek, J.S., Cole, T.W.: Harvesting Cultural Heritage Metadata Using the OAI Protocol. Library Hi Tech 21(2), 159–169 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Van de Sompel, H., Lagoze, C., Nelson, M., Warner, S.: Implementation Guidelines for the Open Archive Initiative Protocol for Metadata Harvesting - Guidelines for Harvester Implementers. Technical report, Open Archive Initiative, p. 6 (2002)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Van de Sompel, H., Lagoze, C., Nelson, M., Warner, S.: The Open Archives Initiative Protocol for Metadata Harvesting, 2nd edn., Technical report, Open Archive Initiative, p. 24 (2003)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Vegas, J., Crestani, F., de la Fuente, P.: Context Representation for Web Search Results. Journal of Information Science 33(1), 77–94 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Information EngineeringUniversity of PaduaItaly

Personalised recommendations