Metadata

Comparative Review of Diane I. Hillmann and Elaine L Westbrooks & American Library Association (2004) Metadata in practice; David Haynes (2004) Metadata for information management and retrieval; Priscilla Caplan (2003) Metadata fundamentals for all librarian

Metadata

Metadata, or data about data, play a crucial rule in social sciences to ensure that high quality documentation and community knowledge are properly captured and surround the data across its entire life cycle, from the early stages of production to secondary analysis by researchers or use by policy makers and other key stakeholders. The paper provides an overview of the social sciences metadata landscape, best practices and related information technologies. It particularly focuses on two specifications - the Data Documentation Initiative (DDI) and the Statistical Data and Metadata Exchange Standard (SDMX) - seen as central to a global metadata management framework for social data and official statistics. It also highlights current directions, outlines typical integration challenges, and provides a set of high level recommendations for producers, archives, researchers and sponsors in order to foster the adoption of metadata standards and best practices in the years to come.social sciences, metadata, data, statistics, documentation, data quality, XML, DDI, SDMX, archive, preservation, production, access, dissemination, analysis

Quality assurance for digital learning object repositories: issues for the metadata creation process

Metadata enables users to find the resources they require, therefore it is an important component of any digital learning object repository. Much work has already been done within the learning technology community to assure metadata quality, focused on the development of metadata standards, specifications and vocabularies and their implementation within repositories. The metadata creation process has thus far been largely overlooked. There has been an assumption that metadata creation will be straightforward and that where machines cannot generate metadata effectively, authors of learning materials will be the most appropriate metadata creators. However, repositories are reporting difficulties in obtaining good quality metadata from their contributors, and it is becoming apparent that the issue of metadata creation warrants attention. This paper surveys the growing body of evidence, including three UK-based case studies, scopes the issues surrounding human-generated metadata creation and identifies questions for further investigation. Collaborative creation of metadata by resource authors and metadata specialists, and the design of tools and processes, are emerging as key areas for deeper research. Research is also needed into how end users will search learning object repositories

Metadata enrichment for digital heritage: users as co-creators

This paper espouses the concept of metadata enrichment through an expert and user-focused approach to metadata creation and management. To this end, it is argued the Web 2.0 paradigm enables users to be proactive metadata creators. As Shirky (2008, p.47) argues Web 2.0’s social tools enable “action by loosely structured groups, operating without managerial direction and outside the profit motive”. Lagoze (2010, p. 37) advises, “the participatory nature of Web 2.0 should not be dismissed as just a popular phenomenon [or fad]”. Carletti (2016) proposes a participatory digital cultural heritage approach where Web 2.0 approaches such as crowdsourcing can be sued to enrich digital cultural objects. It is argued that “heritage crowdsourcing, community-centred projects or other forms of public participation”. On the other hand, the new collaborative approaches of Web 2.0 neither negate nor replace contemporary standards-based metadata approaches. Hence, this paper proposes a mixed metadata approach where user created metadata augments expert-created metadata and vice versa. The metadata creation process no longer remains to be the sole prerogative of the metadata expert. The Web 2.0 collaborative environment would now allow users to participate in both adding and re-using metadata. The case of expert-created (standards-based, top-down) and user-generated metadata (socially-constructed, bottom-up) approach to metadata are complementary rather than mutually-exclusive. The two approaches are often mistakenly considered as dichotomies, albeit incorrectly (Gruber, 2007; Wright, 2007) . This paper espouses the importance of enriching digital information objects with descriptions pertaining the about-ness of information objects. Such richness and diversity of description, it is argued, could chiefly be achieved by involving users in the metadata creation process. This paper presents the importance of the paradigm of metadata enriching and metadata filtering for the cultural heritage domain. Metadata enriching states that a priori metadata that is instantiated and granularly structured by metadata experts is continually enriched through socially-constructed (post-hoc) metadata, whereby users are pro-actively engaged in co-creating metadata. The principle also states that metadata that is enriched is also contextually and semantically linked and openly accessible. In addition, metadata filtering states that metadata resulting from implementing the principle of enriching should be displayed for users in line with their needs and convenience. In both enriching and filtering, users should be considered as prosumers, resulting in what is called collective metadata intelligence

Dublin Core Metadata Harvested Through OAI-PMH

The introduction in 2001 of the Open Archives Initiative Protocol for Metadata Harvesting (OAI-PMH) increased interest in and awareness of metadata quality issues relevant to digital library interoperability and the use of harvested metadata to build "union catalogs" of digital information resources. Practitioners have offered wide-ranging advice to metadata authors and have suggested metrics useful for measuring the quality of shareable metadata. Is there evidence of changes in metadata practice in response to such advice and/or as a result of an increased awareness of the importance of metadata interoperability? This paper looks at metadata records created over a six-year period that have been harvested by the University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign, and reports on quantitative and qualitative analyses of changes observed over time in shareable metadata quality.IMLS National Leadership Grant LG-02-02-0281published or submitted for publicationis peer reviewe

Optimising metadata workflows in a distributed information environment

The different purposes present within a distributed information environment create the potential for repositories to enhance their metadata by capitalising on the diversity of metadata available for any given object. This paper presents three conceptual reference models required to achieve this optimisation of metadata workflow: the ecology of repositories, the object lifecycle model, and the metadata lifecycle model. It suggests a methodology for developing the metadata lifecycle model, and illustrates how it might be used to enhance metadata within a network of repositories and services