1 / 22

METS Revisited

METS Revisited. Bill Kehoe Metadata Working Group Forum December 19, 2003. METS. Metadata Encoding and Transmission Standard Digital Library Federation Initiative Sibling: MOA2 Encoding Format. Why?. Complex digital objects vs physical objects Metadata containers Transfer

rimona
Download Presentation

METS Revisited

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. METS Revisited Bill Kehoe Metadata Working Group Forum December 19, 2003

  2. METS • Metadata Encoding and Transmission Standard • Digital Library Federation Initiative • Sibling: MOA2 Encoding Format

  3. Why? • Complex digital objects vs physical objects • Metadata containers • Transfer • OAIS information packages

  4. Simplest METS object: concept METS document Structural Map Division METS document METS pointer Structural Map Division File pointer

  5. Simplest METS object: elements <mets> <structMap> <div> <mptr> METS document Structure Map Division file pointer

  6. Simplest METS object: XML <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <mets xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/METS/"> <structMap> <div> <mptr LOCTYPE="URL"> http://www.library.cornell.edu/AnotherMETSDoc.xml </mptr> </div> </structMap> </mets>

  7. METS document with a file METS document Structural Map File Section Division File Group File pointer File

  8. The File tag simplified <File> File location ID (required) MIMETYPE XOR SIZE CREATED File content(XML or Base64) CHECKSUMTYPE CHECKSUM

  9. The full METS object: concept Behavior METS Header Structural Links Descriptive Metadata Structural Map Administrative Metadata File Section METS document

  10. The full METS object: 7 basic elements METS document <mets> <dmdSec> <structLink> <structMap> <amdSec> <behaviorSec> <fileSec> <metsHdr>

  11. Administrative Metadata Section <amdSec> <sourceMD> <techMD> <rightsMD> <mdWrap> <mdWrap> <mdWrap> <mdWrap> <mdRef> <mdRef> <mdRef> <mdRef> <digiprovMD>

  12. Descriptive Metadata Section <dmdSec> <mdWrap> <mdRef>

  13. METS Profiles • “…to specify limitations and restrictions…” • “…to define a document class…” • “…to promote interoperability and exchange of METS documents…” From METS Profile 1.0 Requirements, Appendix 1: METS Profile XML Schema

  14. The METS Profile: concept METS Profile Creation Date Structural Requirements URI Contact Information Technical Requirements Short Title Related Profiles Tools and Applications Abstract Extension Schema Sample File

  15. A real-life example…

  16. What can be done with this METS object? • The Tokyo Tribunalhttp://dlib.nyu.edu:8083/xmldev/servlet/SaxonServlet?source=/newtokyo.xml&style=/METSFrameSX.xsl any time thinking about cost models, except where it's obvious that building and maintaining something would be prohibitively expensive. I suppose I have enough opinions, but maybe not enough facts, for a satisfactory working dinner solely about cost models. 

  17. Another example from NYU • Afghanistan Digital Library Page Turnerhttp://dlib.nyu.edu:8083/servlet/SaxonServlet?source=kalimat.xml&style=FrameSearch03.xsl

  18. A Cautionary Tale A presentation by Carl Fleischhauer:The Library of Congress Audio-Visual Prototyping Projecthttp://lcweb.loc.gov/rr/mopic/avprot/METSopening2003_files/slide0001.htm

  19. Two more demos from NYU • An archived web sitehttp://dlib.nyu.edu:8083/xmldev/servlet/SaxonServlet?source=ibarretxe20030907.xml&style=crl2.xsl • Multimedia: METS to SMILhttp://dlib.nyu.edu/metstools/mets2smilviewer/mmvwr04/output/index01.html

  20. Discussion: METS Pros • Potential for interoperability among CUL sites

  21. Discussion: METS Cons • A lot of up-front expense

  22. Almost everything about METS… The METS Official Web Sitehttp://www.loc.gov/standards/mets/

More Related