Content Models for Enhancement and Sustainability: Creating a Generic Framework for Digital Resources in the Arts and Humanities

Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 240)


In this paper we describe a framework to increase the accessibility and reuse of objects stored in digital repositories. In many cases digital repositories are created with little consideration to the wider information environment, or the extension of the repository to items beyond the initial collection. The CMES framework emphasizes providing a structure for creating appropriate content models, selecting appropriate metadata schemas, and the need for a modular approach to the creation of a user interface.


Fedora Islandora content modelling digital repositories 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Alexander, K., Cyganiak, R., Hausenblas, M., Zhao, J.: Describing Linked Datasets – On the Design and Usage of void. In: The “Vocabulary Of Interlinked Datasets”. Linked Data on the Web Workshop 2009 (2009)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Beer, C.A., Pinch, P.D., Cariani, K.: Developing a flexible content model for media repositories: a case study. In: Proceedings of the 9th ACM/IEEE-CS Joint Conference on Digital Libraries, JCDL 2009, pp. 97–100 (2009)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Blanke, T., Aschenbrenner, A., Küster, M., Ludvig, C.: No Claims for Universal Solutions - Possible Lessons from Current e-HumanitiesPractices in Germany and the UK. In: Proceedings of the 4th IEEE e-Science Conference, Indianapolis (2008)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Blekinge-Rasmussen, A., Christiansen, K.F.: Enhanced Content Models (2009),
  5. 5.
  6. 6.
    Foulonneau, M., Riley, J.: Metadata for Digital Resources, Chandos, Oxford (2008)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gartner, R.: Metadata for digital libraries: state of the art and future directions. JISC Technology & Standards Watch (2008),
  8. 8.
    Gilliand, A.J.: Setting the Stage. In: Introduction to Metadata. J. Paul Getty Trust (2008),
  9. 9.
    Green, R.: RepoMMan Project: Experiences with Fedora during the project’s first year (2006),
  10. 10.
    Haslhofer, B., Klas, W.: A Survey of Techniques for Achieving Metadata Interoperability. ACM Computing Surveys 42(2), Article 7 (2010)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
  12. 12.
    Krafft, D.B., Birkland, A., Cramer, E.J.: NCore: Architecture and Implementation of a Flexible Collaborative Digital Library. In: JCDL 2008 Joint Conference on Digital Libraries, Pittsburgh, PA, USA, June 16-20, pp. 313–322 (2008)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lagoze, C., Payette, S., Shin, E., Wilper, C.: Fedora: an architecture for complex objects and their relationships. International Journal on Digital Libraries 6(2), 124–138 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
  15. 15.
    Macgregor, G.: Collection-level descriptions: metadata of the future? Library Review 52(6), 247–250 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    McDonough, J.P.: METS: standardized encoding for digital library objects. International Journal on Digital Libraries 6(2), 148–158 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Nichols, S.: Time to Change Our Thinking: Dismantling the Silo Model of Digital Scholarship. Ariadne 58 (2009),
  18. 18.
  19. 19.
    Poll, R.: NUMERIC: statistics for the digitization of European cultural heritage. Program: Electronic Library and Information Systems 44(2), 122–131 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
  21. 21.
    Schreibman, S., Roper, J.O., Guegen, G.: Cross-collection Searching: A Pandora’s Box or the Holy Grail? Literacry and Linguistic Computing 23(1), 13–24 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for e-ResearchKing’s College LondonLondonUK
  2. 2.HATIIUniversity of GlasgowGlasgowUK
  3. 3.Digital Design StudioGlasgow School of ArtGlasgowUK
  4. 4.School of Information & Library ScienceUniversity of North CarolinaChapel HillUSA

Personalised recommendations