Lifecycle Metadata for Digital Objects

1. Lifecycle Metadata for Digital Objects September 11, 2002 Major archival and digital library metadata schemes

2. NHPRC Initiative, 1991 • Research Issues in Electronic Records • http://www.archives.gov/nhprc_and_other_grants/electronic_records/research_issues_report.html#recommendations • 1992 review of research agenda, MN Historical Society

3. University of Pittsburgh Project • 1992-1996 • “Business Acceptable Communications” • “Warrant” for functional requirements • Legal • Records Management • Management • Medical • Archival

4. Pittsburgh metadata reference model in six layers • Handle • Terms & Conditions • Structural • Contextual • Content • Use History

5. Handle layer • Unique identifier • Record declaration • Transaction domain • Transaction instance • Discovery metadata • Description standard • Descriptors • Language

6. Terms & Conditions Layer • Restrictions status • Access conditions • Use conditions • Disposition requirements

7. Structural Layer • File identification metadata • File encoding metadata • File rendering metadata • Record rendering metadata • Content structure metadata • Source metadata

8. Contextual Layer • Transaction context metadata • Responsibility metadata • System accountability metadata

9. Content Layer (actual data)Use History Layer type instance user consequences

10. Indiana University test of BAC • Evaluating administrative recordkeeping systems at IU • Testing functional requirements • Mapping metadata requirements • Elimination of “metadata encapsulated objects” • Reduction in structural metadata • Pulled back from record-level metadata to record, file, class levels • Influenced by MoReq • Lacks understanding of implementation issues

11. InterPARES Project • Initially a University of British Columbia project that led to DoD STD 5015.2 • Aim to establish characteristics of a reliable and authentic electronic record • InterPARES is international project funded by NHPRC, SSRC, etc. • Aim to establish rest of record life cycle

12. InterPARES case studies • Examine digital recordkeeping systems in wide variety of contexts worldwide • Qualitative methods used to discover how records are used, carry out functional analysis • Data used to provide basis for modeling preservation processes

13. InterPARES basis in diplomatics • 19th-century method for establishing genuineness of documents • Defines four types of records: • Dispositive (form is essence of evidence) • Probative (written form part of evidence) • Supporting (written form discretionary, procedurally linked to action) • Narrative (provide context)

14. InterPARES Authenticity template • Documentary form • Extrinsic elements • Intrinsic elements • Annotations • Medium • Context

15. InterPARES findings, 2002 • Hopes for a clear typology dashed after four rounds • Contemporary systems too fluid for model • No fixed form or content • No annotations • Embedded in social contexts • Managed procedurally

16. Dublin Core Metadata Initiative • Supported by OCLC • Primarily a surrogate/discovery metadata scheme • Does not aim to document everything • Useful for management of active digital objects

17. Title Creator Subject Description Publisher Contributor Date Type Format Identifier Source Language Relation Coverage Rights Dublin Core elements

18. Dublin Core development • Initial development of simple elements • Subelements and user communities • Warwick Framework • RDF and XML

19. Dublin Core in HTML environment • Example: MDAH • http://www.mdah.state.ms.us • Example:

20. Metadata Encoding and Transmission Standard (METS) • Developed out of LoC’s MOA project • Designed to support maintenance of library of digital objects • Three overall types of metadata • Descriptive • Administrative • Structural

21. METS Descriptive metadata • External (e.g., finding aid) • Internal (part of the document)

22. METS Administrative metadata • Technical metadata • Intellectual property rights metadata • Source metadata (re analog source) • Digital provenance metadata • Relations between files • Migration/transformation data

23. METS Structural metadata • File groups list • Structural map (defines relations between files and METS element structure) • Behavior segment (associates executable methods with specific content elements, e.g. for display)

24. METS and XML • The METS XML schema • http://www.loc.gov/standards/mets/mets_xsd/mets.html • Why is it all so complicated? • How can anyone ever keep track of all this metadata?