Metadata
Standards
Directory
WORKING GROUP
Metadata Standards Directory
Alex Ball
University of Bath
RDA Europe Webinar
16 February 2016
Outline
Motivation: Why use metadata standards, and why many don’t
Prior work: Finding a perfect match
Methodology: The Working Group
Results: The Metadata Standards Directory
Next steps: The Metadata Standards Catalog
Acknowledgements
Why should I use a metadata
standard?
Better discovery




versus





Better context










versus








|

 
Better reuse


 
versus


|
Better ecosystem
É
Less working things out from scratch
É
More complete metadata
É
Benefits of practising
É
Better documentation of the standards
É
Concentration of development attention and effort
É
Better time-saving tools
É
etc., etc.
So why doesn’t everyone use a
metadata standard?
1
2
3
Metadata standards used
No suitable standard?
None
My lab
ISO
Open GIS
EML
FDGC
Other
DC
DwC
DIF
56.1%
22.1%
8.0%
8.0%
7.9%
7.9%
6.8%
2.2%
1.7%
1.0%
0
100
200 300 400 500 600
Responses (N = 1205/1329)
700
Figure: Metadata for scientific data (Source: Tenopir et al. 2011)
Back
Forward
Too many standards?
(Source: c b n Randall Munroe)
‘The nice thing about standards is that you have so many to choose
from’ — Tanenbaum (1988)
Back
Forward
Isn’t that, like, really hard?
Just fill out this simple form…
<mods xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3"
xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3
http://www.loc.gov/standards/mods/v3/mods-3-4.xsd"> <titleInfo> <title> Title goes here
</title> </titleInfo> <name type="personal"> <namePart>Author name goes here</namePart>
<role> <roleTerm type="text">Author</roleTerm> </role> </name>
<typeOfResource>dataset</typeOfResource> <genre>Dataset</genre> <originInfo>
<publisher>Publisher name goes here</publisher> </originInfo> <language> <languageTerm
type="text">Language name</languageTerm> <languageTerm type="code"
authority="iso639-2b">ISO 639-2b code</languageTerm> </language> <physicalDescription>
<internetMediaType>MIME type goes here, repeat as necessary</internetMediaType>
<digitalOrigin>born digital</digitalOrigin> <extent>Number of records in your database,
or size of file in bytes</extent> </physicalDescription> <abstract> Abstract goes here
</abstract> <subject authority="scheme name goes here"> <topic>Keyword goes here, repeat
as necessary</topic> <cartographics>Spatial coordinates<cartographics/>
<temporal>Temporal extente</temporal> <geographic>Spatial extent in words</geographic>
</subject> <identifier>ID goes here</identifier> <location> <url usage="primary display"
access="object in context">Location of record</url> <url access="raw object">Location
for download</url> </location> <accessCondition type="useAndReproduction"> Usage
restrictions or permissions </accessCondition> <relatedItem ID="relatedMaterials">
<location> <url usage="primary display" access="object in context">Record of related
item</url> </location> </relatedItem> <note type="citation"> Sample citation goes here
</note> <note type="software">Required software goes here</note> <subject ID="location"
displayLabel="Description of spatial extent again"> <cartographics> <coordinates> List
of coordinates, comma separated </coordinates> </cartographics> <topic>Type of
coordinates goes here</topic> </subject> </mods>
Back
Forward
Science Data Literacy Project
http://sdl.syr.edu/?page_id=32
Scientific Data Application Profile Scoping Study
Scientific Data Application Profile
Scoping Study Report
Document details
Author:
Alexander Ball, UKOLN, University of Bath
Date:
3rd June 2009
Version:
1.1
Document Name:
sdapss.pdf
Notes:
Changes from version 1.0:
Typographical corrections made.
References added.
Conclusions expanded.
http://
www.ukoln.ac.uk/
projects/sdapss/
Seeing Standards
ar ie
Ge osp
y
ak
rd
Arch
In
IEEE/LOM,
ISAD(G),
NewsML,
SKOS
GML
ge
Strong connection
ua
ng
olar
ies
ms
ma
MPEG-21 DIDL, MXF
t
Font Size
=
Starís strength for
given category
ord
Me
Lib
tive
Museu
For
Rec
Technical Metadata
Struc
tural
Metad
Meta
ata
data
R ights
crip
rar
Des
stry
Semi-Strong connection
La
dard
rk
tent
Con
Ma
s
Indu
up
Stan
ly Text
TEI
es
Archiv
tion
rma
tad
Info
ata
The sheer number of metadata standards in the cultural
heritage sector is overwhelming, and their inter-relationships
further complicate the situation. This visual map of the
metadata landscape is intended to assist planners with the
selection and implementation of metadata standards.
Each of the 105 standards listed here is evaluated on its
strength of application to defined categories in each of four
axes: community, domain, function, and purpose. The strength
of a standard in a given category is determined by a mixture of
its adoption in that category, its design intent, and its overall
appropriateness for use in that category.
The standards represented here are among those most heavily
used or publicized in the cultural heritage community, though
certainly not all standards that might be relevant are included.
A small subset of the standards plotted on the main
visualization also appear as highlights above the graphic. These
represent the most commonly known or discussed standards for
cultural heritage metadata.
Strength of
Standardís connection
indicated by
Font Size
&
Color
Saturation
Weak
Conn
ection
Sliver
=
Category
Sem
Con i-Weak
nec
tion
fo
rm
at
io
Stro
Con ng
nec
tion
The standards listed
closest to the center
of a sliver are those
that are most strongly
connected to the given
category.
RD
ives
In
du
st
ry
Markup
Language
SGML, XML
KML,
NewsML
tro
ng
Sem
i-W
ea
Se
m
i-S
PRISM
g
Str
on
AAT, BISAC, DDC,
LCC, LCSH, MARC
Relator Codes, MESH,
Sears List of Subject
Headings, TGM I, TGM II,
TGN, ULAN
AACR2, APPM,
CCO, DACS, RAD, RDA
ISAAR(CPF), ISBD, RDF
CIDOC/CRM, FRAD, FRBR, FRSAD,
indecs, OAIS, VSO Data Model
EML, MEI, MusicXML,
NewsML, SGML, XML
MEI, MusicXML,
OAI-ORE, TEI
Atom, KML, MathML, RSS
AACR2, AAT, AGLS, APPM,
BISAC, CanCore, CCO, CDWA, CDWA Lite, CIDOC/CRM,
DACS, DC, DCAM, DDC, DIF, DIG35, DwC, EAC-CPF, EAD, EML,
FGDC/CSDGM, FOAF, FRAD, FRBR, FRSAD, GEM, GILS, GML, ID3,
IEEE/LOM, indecs, ISAAR(CPF), ISAD(G), ISBD, ISO 19115, LCC,
LCSH, Linked Data, MADS, MARC, MARC Relator Codes,
MARCXML, MESH, MO, MODS, MPEG-7, MuseumDat,
NewsML, OAI-PMH, ONIX, Ontology for Media
Resource, PB Core, PRISM, QDC, RAD, RDA,
Atom, OpenURL, RDF, RSS, SGML,
SCORM, Sears List of Subject Headings,
VSO Data Model, XML, XMP
SKOS, SPECTRUM, SRU, SWAP, TGM I,
METS,
TGM II, TGN, Topic Maps, ULAN,
MPEG-21
VRA Core, XOBIS,
DIDL, MXF
Z39.50
SCORM
Descriptive
Metadata
SGML, XML
Metadata
Wrappers
Pre
Metadata
ADL, TEI, XMP
Sem
i-Stron
Con
g
nec
tion
n
EAD, EML,
DCAM,
GML,
DTD, Linked Data,
MathML,
OAI-ORE, OAI-PMH,
MEI,
OpenURL, RDF,
MusicRELAX NG, SGML,
SRU, Topic
Maps, XML,
XML Schema,
XPath,
XQuery
XSL
Z39.50
k
We
AGLS,
CanCore
atia
l Da
ta
Datasets
Cultural Objects
at
s
rm
ra rie
lar
nda
re Sta
Mu
ard
nd
Sta
nt
nte
Co
bu
Fo
Lib
s
ms
seu
ra rie
Mu
ies
rar
Lib
Lib
gy
o lo
hn
/T
ec
o rk
ew
am
ard
nd
Sta
nt
nte
Co
Fr
se um s
s
Li br
ms
seu
Mu
ca
a ta
s
Vo
rd
ad
eum
co
et
a ta
ie s
d
lle
M
ad
Mus
ro
Re
ti ve
et
Mu
ard
nd
Sta
nt
nte
Co
nt
Technical Metadata
Struc
tural
Meta
data
Me
tad
ata
hts
ip
M
ar
Rig
GEM, METS
Rights, QDC,
VRA Core
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons
Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License
<http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/us/>.
Sch
ak
Co
QDC Structu
st ry
a ta
CDWA, MPEG-21
DIDL, VRA Core
Summary and Purpose
We
ives
In du
Atom, RSS,
SKOS
Data
AACR2, AES Core
Audio, AES Process
History, APPM,
CanCore, DACS,
DDC, DwC,
EAC-CPF, EAD,
FGDC/CSDGM,
FRBR, GEM,
IEEE/LOM,
ISAAR(CPF), ISAD(G),
ISO 19115, KML, LCC,
LCSH, MADS, MARC
Relator Codes, MESH,
METS, METS Rights,
MPEG-7, ODRL, PB
Core, RAD, RDA,
RELAX NG, SMIL, SRU,
TEI, TextMD, XMP,
XOBIS, XrML, Z39.50
Stars represent those
standards that are used
most often.
ea
mi-W
io n
Framework/
Technology
Controlled
Vocabulary
Conceptual Model
LEGEND
Se
at
ad
Li br
s
s
eum
ar ie
Arch
rm
et
Museums
ati al
Da ta
Datasets
Cultural Objects
In fo
Content Standard
Design: Devin Becker
Atom, DC, DCAM,
FOAF, indecs,
Linked Data, MIX,
MODS, OAI-ORE,
OAIS, PREMIS,
QDC, RDF, RSS,
SGML, SKOS,
TGM I,
TGM II, Topic
Maps
DTD, OAI-PMH, VRA
Core, XML,
XMLSchema, XPath,
XQuery, XSLT
Ge osp
data
cr
Mus
Meta
ata
ti ve
Li br
tural
tad
M
CDWA, DC, GILS,
ISAD(G), ISBD, MARC,
MARCXML, MODS,
QDC, TEI, VRA Core
k
, ID3, ISAD(G), KML, MPEG-7, MusicXML, MXF, ODRL, RAD, SMIL, VSO Data Model, XMP, XRML
Me
Content: Jenn Riley
Work funded by the Indiana University Librariesí
White Professional Development Award
Visual
Resources
g
tron
i-S
A, CDWA Lite, CIDOC/CRM, DACS, DwC, EAC-CPF,
, indecs, ISAAR(CPF), ISO 19115, Linked Data,
MPEG-21 DIDL, ONIX, RELAX NG, RSS, SKOS, Topic Maps, ULAN
co
Struc
a ta
NewsML, ODRL, PREMIS, RAD,
RDA, RDF, RELAX NG, SGML,
SKOS, SMIL, XMP, XOBIS,
XQuery, XrML
DDC, FRBR,
LCC
Sem
Libraries
Voc
hts
AACR2, AES Core
Audio, CCO, DC,
EAC-CPF, EML,
IEEE/LOM, MIX, MODS,
NewsML, ODRL, ONIX, PB
Core, RAD, RDA,
TextMD, XrML
OAIS
e Audio, AES Process History, CanCore,
CCO, DC, DCAM, DTD, FGDC/CSDGM, GEM,
IEEE/LOM, MEI, METS Rights, OAI-ORE, PB
, SGML, TGN, XQuery
d
Re
Rig
ti ve
ad
A Visualization of the
Metadata Universe
Scholarly
Texts
AGLS, APPM,
Atom, DACS,
EAC-CPF, EAD,
ISAAR(CPF),
ISAD(G), LCSH,
MARC,
MARCXML,
AACR2, CanCore,
OAI-ORE, RSS,
CIDOC/CRM, DCAM, GEM,
SCORM, Sears
IEEE/LOM, indecs, ISBD, Linked Data,
List of Subject
MADS, MARC Relator Codes, METS
Headings, Topic
Rights, MODS, MPEG-7, MuseumDat,
Maps
Subject Headings, SRU, SWAP, TEI,
extMD, TGM I, TGM II, VRA Core,
XML, XML Schema, XOBIS, XPath,
, Z39.50
olle
ta
st ry
D es
du
n In
ip
ip
ata
at io
cr
rm
In fo
D es
tad
ntr
ONIXStru
at
Copyright 2009-2010 Jenn Riley
AAT, CCO, CDWA, CDWA Lite, CIDOC/CRM,
MuseumDat, SPECTRUM, TGN, ULAN`
AACR2, AGLS,
CQL, DDC, FRAD,
FRBR, FRSAD, GILS,
ISBD, LCC, LCSH,
MADS, MARC, MARC
Relator Codes, MARCXML,
MESH, METS, MIX, MODS,
OAI-PMH, OAIS, OpenURL,
g
on
PREMIS, RDA, Sears List of
Str
Co
s
rm
Re souTex tss
ual
lar ly er ial
Sc ho l M at ag es
ica
Im
us
ng
o vi
M
xt
Fo
Me
at
lary
rm
Fo
rd
rd
Sta nda
ctu re
abu
y Te
rd
da
la rl
co
hts
cr
Ind
on
orm
D es
ati
Inf
Re
Rig
hiv es us try
et
ADL, AES Core Audio,
AES Process History,
DC, DTD, FRBR, ID3,
LCSH, MEI, METS, MO,
DC, DTD,
MPEG-21 DIDL,
ISBD, LCSH,
MusicXML, MXF,
METS, MPEG-21 DIDL,
Ontology for Media
OAI-ORE, OAI-PMH,
Resource, PB Core,
OAIS, ONIX, OpenURL,
QDC, XML, XML
QDC, SRU, SWAP, TEI,
Schema, XPath,
AAT, CCO,
TextMD, XML, XML
, Z39.50
CDWA, CDWA Lite,
Schema, XPath,
DC, DIG35, DTD, METS,
XSLT, Z39.50
MIX, MPEG-21 DIDL, OAI-PMH,
OAIS, Ontology for Media Resource, PB
Core, QDC, SRU, TGM I, TGM II, TGN, ULAN,
VRA Core, XML, XML Schema, XPath, XSLT, Z39.50
OAI-PMH
Arc
M
AGLS, Atom,
BISAC, DACS, DCAM,
DDC, FRBR, indecs, LCC,
Linked Data, MADS, MARC, MARC
Relator Codes, METS Rights, MODS,
PREMIS, PRISM, RDF, RELAX NG,
RSS, Sears List of Subject
Headings, SGML, SKOS, XMP,
XOBIS, XQuery, XrML
MESH,
atia
l Da
ta
Datasets
Seeing Standards:
MathML, MIX
CanCore,
EAC-CPF, EAD, GEM,
IEEE/LOM, ISAAR(CPF),
ISAD(G), MARCXML, ODRL,
Ontology for Media
Resource, SCORM, TGN,
AACR2,
Topic Maps
Ge osp
Cultural Objects
Technical Metadata
hts Struc
tural
Me
Meta
tad
data
ata
ti ve
AACR2, DCAM, DDC,
indecs, ISBD, LCC, Linked
Data, MADS, MARC, MARC
Relator Codes, MARCXML, METS
Rights, MODS, OAI-PMH, OAIS,
ODRL, PREMIS, RAD, RDA, RDF,
RELAX NG, Sears List of Subject
Headings, SGML, SKOS, SMIL, SRU,
XOBIS, XQuery, XrML
Musical
Materials
lary
at
abu
rm
Voc
Fo
d
rd
rd
co
Sta nda
Re ctu re
olle
ip
a ta
AGLS, APPM, Atom,
CIDOC/CRM, DACS, EAC-CPF, EAD,
ISAAR(CPF), ISAD(G), MPEG-7, OAI-ORE,
RSS, SCORM, Topic Maps
ntr
Im
ar
cr
ad
Li br
Str
ad uct ura l
Me
at
tad
a
ata
W
ra
pp
er
s
Rig
Semi-Weak
Semi-Strong
Co
MODSStru
ng
tial
Data
Datasets
al
et
a ta
tion
spa
Cultural Objects
hiv es ie s
Arc
D es
M
ad
rma
Geo
o vi
et
Info
CanCore, GEM, IEEE/LOM, MIX,
MuseumDat, TGN, XMP
at
rm
rd
Fo
rd
Sta nda
ctu re
Stru
METS
M
et
hiv es ust ry
Ind
co
ic
ti ve
M
Arc
Re
M
ip
l Da
ta
Datasets
Cultural Objects
es
so urc s
xt
l Re
y Te ia ls
la rl er
ho M at es
ag
atia
us
Ge osp
Sc
cr
ti ve
Technical Metadata
Struc
tural
Meta
data
tad
ata
Me
s
rce s
Re souTe xt
ls
rly
la er ia
ho at es
M ag
al Im
ng
o vi
hts
ic
Rig
ar
M
MARC
ie s
s
Li br
us
ive
D es
ip
Weak
at a
Sc
es
cr
Ar ch
at
rm
Fo
rd
rd
Sta nda
co
ctu re
Stru
Re
Cultural Objects
D es
Ind
l Data
Datasets
ual
LCSH
hiv es
ry
ust
tion
patia
M
Geos
es
so urc
l Re Te xts
Vis ua lar ly ia ls s
Sc ho at er a g e
M Im
al
ic n g
M us M o vi
la ry
ho
bu
Sc
ca
M
d Vo
Vis ua
lle
Vis
ro
es
so urc s
l Re Te xt
y ls
la rl er ia e s
ho at g
Sc M Im a
al
ic n g
M us o vi
M
nt
Vis ua
s
s
rma
Co
ourc
s
al Res
xt
Visu
Te ls
rly ia
la at er
es
ho
Sc al M ag
Im
ic
us
ng
o vi
M
xt
Arc
Info
urce
l Data
M
l Reso
patia
a
ta
Visua
Te ls
rly ia
la er s
ho at g e
M a
Sc
al
ic g Im
M us vi n
o
Geos
tural Objects
http://www.dlib.indiana.edu/~jenlrile/metadatamap/
OAIS
BioSharing
https://
biosharing.org/
standards/
MMI Content Standard References
https://marinemetadata.org/conventions/content-standards
GEOSS Standards and Interoperability Registry
https://www
.earthobservations
.org/gci_sr.shtml
CINERGI
http://earthcube.org/group/cinergi
MSDWG Goals
1. Develop an RDA Metadata Standards Directory listing standards
relevant for research data
É
É
Comprehensive
Easy for anyone to contribute or update
2. Define and develop use cases for research metadata
3. Develop a plan for long-term growth and maintenance of the
directory
Stakeholder engagement
Stakeholders
É
researchers
É
tool developers
É
data managers
É
repositories
É
data scientists
É
funders
É
research support staff
É
publishers
Outreach
É CAMP-4-DATA at DC-2013, Lisbon:
26 participants from 15 countries
É International Digital Curation Conference
2014, San Francisco (A. Ball)
É RDA-EU Working Group Core Meeting,
2014, Garching, Munich (J. Greenberg)
É Working Group mailing list
Model
e Manual
Plans
nd assessment
required for data re-use. This page provides links to information about these disciplinary metadata standards, including
profiles, tools to implement the standards, and use cases of data repositories currently implementing them.
Disciplinary Metadata Catalogue
For those disciplines that have not yet settled on a metadata standard, and for those repositories that work with data
across disciplines, the General Research Data section links to information about broader metadata standards that have
been adapted to suit the needs of research data.
Search by Discipline
etadata
resentations
Biology
Earth Science
General Research Data
ch
http://www.dcc.ac.uk/
resources/metadata-standards
Physical Science
Search by Resource Type
Social Science & Humanities
See Ball (2013) for details
Metadata Standards
Specifications for the minimum information that should be collected about research data in order for it to be re-used.
Profiles and Extensions
Standards that have been adapted for use in particular types of repositories, or for particular types of data.
Use cases
Institutional repositories and data portals using standards to determine which metadata should be collected upon
data deposit.
Tools
Software that has been developed to capture or store metadata conforming to a specific standard.
Issues to address
 UK selection bias
 Incompleteness
 Conduct a worldwide survey to fill in the gaps
 Process for maintenance slow and opaque
 Little scope for future development
 Migrate to a new platform to
 make it easier and more transparent to contribute
 support a larger team of volunteer editors
 allow for future development
MSDWG Survey
É
Conducted by Sean Chen and Cristina
Perez
É
Pilot phase: September 2013
É
First phase: 8–22 October 2013
É
É
Second phase: November 2013 – April 2014
41 responses:
É
É
É
É
É
É
14 new standards
4 new profiles
13 new metadata tools
19 new use cases
18 updates
See Perez (2013) for details
http://bit.ly/1fToaqd
Platform migration
Site setup Dec 2013 – Mar 2014
by Sean Chen
Content migration May – Aug 2014
by Kate Anne Alderete and Sean Chen
Delivery preparation Jan – Feb 2015
by Dustin Allen, Alex Ball, Sean Chen
and Adrian Ogletree
Launch Mar 2015
at RDA Plenary 5
http://rd-alliance.github.io/metadata-directory/
Data model
Metadata
standard
More
specific
profile
Helper tool
Subject
Use case
Discipline
Metadata standard record
Metadata
MIDAS-Heritage
RDA | Metadata Directory
A British cultural heritage standard for recording information on buildings,
archaeological sites, shipwrecks, parks and gardens, battlefields, areas of interest
and artefacts.
Edit this page
Sponsored by the Forum on Information Standards in Heritage, MIDAS Version 1.1
was released in October 2012.
Getting Started
Summary
View the standards
View the extensions
View the tools
View the use cases
Browse by subject areas
Adding standards
Adding extensions
Adding tools
Adding use cases
 github
 @twitter
 linkedin
 facebook
É
 Edit
Standard Website
http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/publications/midas-heritage/
Specification
http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/content/publications/publicationsNew/guidelinesstandards/midas-heritage/midas-heritage-2012-v1_1.pdf
Related Vocabularies
INSCRIPTION
Subjects
Arts and Humanities
Social and Behavioral Sciences
Disciplines
Archaeology
Architecture
Building Conservation
Heritage Studies
Historical and Philosophical Studies
History by Area
Extensions
 Add
CARARE metadata schema  Edit
An application profile of the MIDAS Heritage standard intended for delivering
metadata to the CARARE service environment about an organisation’s online
collections, monument inventory database and digital objects.




É
É
Page is generated
from simple, easy to
edit text file.
‘Edit’ links give
access to source.
‘Add’ links for
quickly adding
profiles, tools or use
cases.
Metadata standard record
--title: MIDAS-Heritage
slug: midas-heritage
description: <p>A British cultural heritage standard for
recording information on buildings, archaeological ...
MIDAS Version 1.1 was released in October 2012.</p>
website: http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/publicatio...
subjects:
- arts-and-humanities
- social-and-behavioral-sciences
disciplines:
- history-area
- heritage-studies
- building-conservation
- historical-and-philosophical-studies
- architecture
- archaeology
specification_url: http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/...
related_vocabularies:
- name: INSCRIPTION
url: http://fishforum.weebly.com
---
É
É
É
Page is generated
from simple, easy to
edit text file.
‘Edit’ links give
access to source.
‘Add’ links for
quickly adding
profiles, tools or use
cases.
Browsing the Directory
Indexes by subject for
É
standards
É
profiles
É
tools
É
use cases
Discipline-specific lists
of all four
Index of disciplines by
subject
Browsing the Directory
Indexes by subject for
É
standards
É
profiles
É
tools
É
use cases
Discipline-specific lists
of all four
Index of disciplines by
subject
Browsing the Directory
Indexes by subject for
É
standards
É
profiles
É
tools
É
use cases
Discipline-specific lists
of all four
Index of disciplines by
subject
Contributing
Usage
GitHub
DCC Website
Jan 1 – Dec 31, 2015
Total page views: 485 309
events
14%
9%
resources/how-guides 6%
resources/metadata-standards
71%
other
But we can do better than that…
Use cases (1)
Data providers and custodians would like to use the Directory
É
É
É
É
to search or browse for metadata standards by what they describe
– physical artifacts, video, etc.
to compare standards side-by-side, especially to identify
commonalities between the standards of different communities.
to obtain recommendations of standards to use based on criteria I
provide.
to look up the persistent ID (PID) for a standard, for robust linking.
Librarians would like to use the Directory
É
to inspect existing profiles of a standard as a first step to
constructing their own.
Use cases (2)
Journal editors would like to use the Directory
É
to check the maturity and level of support of existing standards, so
they know which to recommend to authors.
Funders would like to use the Directory
É
to find out of which standards they have funded the development,
whether they are widely used, whether they have been kept up to
date, and whether they might be merged into other standards.
Tool developers would like
É
É
to submit a whole or partial dataset and retrieve a list of metadata
standards which could be used to document it.
to generate a ‘first attempt’ crosswalk between schemas
automatically.
Use cases (3)
Tool developers would like
É
É
É
É
É
to submit a set of field names to the Directory and retrieve the
metadata standard from which they originate.
to request from the Directory a sample of metadata records
adhering to a specific standard.
to retrieve a list of appropriate metadata standards based on the
partial content from a draft data management plan.
to submit a PID for a metadata standard to the Directory and
retrieve the specification for the standard.
to submit a pair of PIDs for metadata standards to the Directory
and retrieve a suggested migration pathway.
Can you think of any others?
From Directory to Catalog
Can only hope to satisfy such use cases
É with more detail about each standard/profile
É
É
É
É
É
É
information at the element level?
specifications in ‘native’ form?
specifications in a normalized form?
converters in a normalized form?
data types for which the standard used?
whether tied to a given format, whether RDF-friendly?
É
with an API for automated access to the information
É
with structured outputs so tools can act on the information
Also need to make it even easier for people to contribute,
directly or via tools.
Metadata Standards Catalog Working Group
É
É
É
É
Recognized and endorsed on 18
January 2016
By 18 July 2016, collect and analyse use
cases to produce requirements and
technical specification for the Catalog
By 18 January 2017, develop prototype
Catalog and identify adopters
By 18 July 2017, evaluate and validate
Catalog; add mappings from selection
of standards to functional ‘packages’;
refine user interface and API.
Please join us!
https://rd-alliance.org/groups/
metadata-standards-catalog-working-group.html
Acknowledgements
Fellow MSDWG co-chairs
É
Jane Greenberg, 〈MRC〉
É
Keith Jeffery
É
Rebecca Koskela, DataONE
DCC Disciplinary Metadata Catalogue
É
Liz Bedford, DCC
Survey and GitHub work
É
Sean Chen, 〈MRC〉
É
Cristina Perez, 〈MRC〉
É
Kate Anne Alderete, DataONE
É
Adrian Ogletree, 〈MRC〉
Thank you to Working Group
members who suggested
directory entries, provided
use cases, and helped to
steer the work.
References (1)
Ball, A. (2009), Scientific Data Application Profile Scoping Study Report,
version 1.1, Scoping study (Bath, UK: UKOLN, University of Bath,
3 June), http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/projects/sdapss/papers/
ball2009sda-v11.pdf.
Ball, A. (2013), ‘The DCC Disciplinary Metadata Catalogue’, Paper
presented at the CAMP-4-DATA Workshop, International Conference
on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications 2013, Lisbon, Portugal,
http:
//dcevents.dublincore.org/IntConf/dc-2013/paper/view/203.
Perez, C. I. (2013), ‘The RDA’s Metadata Standards Directory:
Information gathering’, Unpublished master’s paper (University of
North Carolina, Chapel Hill).
References (2)
Qin, J., Small, R., and D’Ignazio, J. (2008), ‘Metadata standards’,
Syracuse University, Science Data Literacy Project,
http://sdl.syr.edu/?page_id=32.
Riley, J. and Becker, D. (2010), ‘Seeing Standards: A Visualization of the
Metadata Universe’, Indiana University Libraries,
http://www.dlib.indiana.edu/~jenlrile/metadatamap/.
Tanenbaum, A. S. (1988), Computer Networks, (2nd edn., Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Prentice-Hall), ISBN: 0-13-162959-X.
Tenopir, C. et al. (2011), ‘Data Sharing by Scientists: Practices and
Perceptions’, PLoS ONE, 6/6: e21101, doi:
10.1371/journal.pone.0021101.
Metadata
Standards
Directory
WORKING GROUP
Thank you for your attention
Alex Ball: http://alexball.me.uk/
Metadata Standards Directory Working Group:
https://rd-alliance.org/groups/metadata-standards-directory-working-group.html