1 / 24

Understanding Digital Object Metadata: Insights from Archival Research (2002)

This document provides an in-depth examination of various metadata schemes for digital objects, exploring key research issues related to electronic records. It highlights the NHPRC initiative, critical findings from the InterPARES project, and various frameworks like Dublin Core and METS. The paper elaborates on functional requirements, legal considerations, and the importance of unique identifiers and context in record management. By addressing significant advancements and challenges in metadata documentation, it serves as a valuable resource for digital librarians, archivists, and researchers.

gilon
Download Presentation

Understanding Digital Object Metadata: Insights from Archival Research (2002)

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. 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?

More Related