Notes
Slide Show
Outline
1
OAI metadata: why and how
  • Jenn Riley
  • Metadata Librarian
  • Indiana University
2
Why share metadata?
  • Benefits to users
    • One-stop searching
    • Aggregation of subject-specific resources
  • Benefits to institutions
    • Increased exposure for collections
    • Broader user base
    • Bringing together of distributed collections
3
Why share metadata with OAI?
  • “Low barrier” protocol
  • Shares metadata only, not content, simplifying rights issues
  • Same effort on your part to share with one or a hundred service providers (basically)
  • Wide adoption in the cultural heritage sector
  • Quickly eclipsed older methods such as Z39.50
4
Three possible architectures
5
Basic metadata sharing workflow
  • Create metadata, thinking about shareability
  • Determine format(s) you wish to share your metadata in
  • Transform records into versions appropriate for sharing via OAI
  • Validate transformed metadata
  • Load transformed metadata into OAI data provider
  • Test with OAI Repository Explorer
  • Communicate with service providers
  • See what your metadata looks like once a service provider harvests it
6
Shareable metadata
  • Jenn Riley
  • Metadata Librarian
  • Indiana University
7
Shareable metadata defined
  • Promotes search interoperability - “the ability to perform a search over diverse sets of metadata records and obtain meaningful results” (Priscilla Caplan)
  • Is human understandable outside of its local context
  • Is useful outside of its local context
  • Preferably is machine processable
8
Finding the right balance
  • Metadata providers know the materials
    • Document encoding schemes and controlled vocabularies
    • Document practices
    • Ensure record validity
  • Aggregators have the processing power
    • Format conversion
    • Reconcile known vocabularies
    • Normalize data
    • Batch metadata enhancement
9
Metadata as a view of the resource
  • There is no monolithic, one-size-fits-all metadata record
  • Metadata for the same thing is different depending on use and audience
  • Affected by format, content, and context
  • Harry Potter as represented by…
    • a public library
    • an online bookstore
    • a fan site
10
Choice of vocabularies as a view
  • Names
    • LCNAF: Michelangelo Buonarroti, 1475-1564
    • ULAN: Buonarroti, Michelangelo
  • Places
    • LCSH: Jakarta (Indonesia)
    • TGN: Jakarta
  • Subjects
    • LCSH: Neo-impressionism (Art)
    • AAT: Pointillism
11
Choice of metadata format(s) as a view
  • Many factors affect choice of metadata formats
  • MARC, MODS, Dublin Core, EAD, and TEI may all be appropriate for a single item
  • High-quality metadata in a format not common in your community of practice is not shareable
12
6 Cs and lots of Ss of shareable metadata
  • Content
  • Consistency
  • Coherence
  • Context
  • Communication
  • Conformance



  • Metadata standards
    Vocabulary and encoding standards
  • Descriptive content standards
    Technical standards
13
Content
  • Choose appropriate vocabularies
  • Choose appropriate granularity
  • Make it obvious what to display
  • Make it obvious what to index
  • Exclude unnecessary “filler”
  • Make it clear what links point to
14
Consistency
  • Records in a set should all reflect the same practice
    • Fields used
    • Vocabularies
    • Syntax encoding schemes
  • Allows aggregators to apply same enhancement logic to an entire group of records
15
Coherence
  • Record should be self-explanatory
  • Values must appear in appropriate elements
  • Repeat fields instead of “packing” to explicitly indicate where one value ends and another begins
16
Context
  • Include information not used locally
  • Exclude information only used locally
  • Current safe assumptions
    • Users discover material through shared record
    • User then delivered to your environment for full context
  • Context driven by intended use
17
Communication
  • Method for creating shared records
  • Vocabularies and content standards used in shared records
  • Record updating practices and schedules
  • Accrual practices and schedules
  • Existence of analytical or supplementary materials
  • Provenance of materials
18
Conformance to Standards
  • Metadata standards (and not just DC)
  • Vocabulary and encoding standards
  • Descriptive content standards (AACR2, CCO, DACS)
  • Technical standards (XML, Character encoding, etc)
19
Before you share…
  • Check your metadata
    • Appropriate view?
    • Consistent?
    • Context provided?
    • Does the aggregator have what they need?
    • Documented?


    • Can a stranger tell you what the record describes?
20
The reality of sharing metadata
  • Creating shareable metadata requires thinking outside of your local box
  • Creating shareable metadata will require more work on your part
  • Creating shareable metadata will require our vendors to support (more) standards
  • Creating shareable metadata is no longer an option, it’s a requirement
21
Choosing metadata formats
  • Jenn Riley
  • Metadata Librarian
  • Indiana University
22
Consider the materials
  • Format
  • Genre
  • Specialized vs. general audience
  • Primary vs. secondary
  • Use


23
Consider the standards
  • Purpose
  • Multi-level vs. item-level description
  • Method of expression
  • Reputation of developer
  • Stability
  • Update frequency
24
Consider your institution
  • Library, archival, or museum tradition
  • Standards used in your community
  • Resources and expertise available
  • Formats already being used
  • Systems and workflows already in place
25
Consider the needs of the project
  • Robustness of description desired
  • Describing multiple versions
  • Relationships between records
  • Other management needs