1. JENN RILEY METADATA LIBRARIAN IU DIGITAL LIBRARY PROGRAM Introduction to Metadata

2. Many definitions of metadata 4/12/10 S504 Spring 2010 2 “Data about data” “Structured information about an information resource of any media type or format.” (Caplan) “Structured information that describes, explains, locates, or otherwise makes it easier to retrieve, use, or manage an information resource.” (NISO) “Metadata is constructed, constructive, and actionable.” (Coyle) …

3. Metadata and cataloging 4/12/10 S504 Spring 2010 3 Depends on what you mean by:  metadata, and  cataloging! But, in general:  Metadata is broader in scope than cataloging  Much metadata creation takes place outside of libraries  Good metadata practitioners use key cataloging principles in non-MARC environments  Metadata created for many different types of materials Metadata is NOT only for Internet resources!

4. Some types of metadata TypeUse Descriptive metadataSearching Browsing Display Interoperability Technical metadataInteroperability Digital object management Preservation Preservation metadataInteroperability Preservation Rights metadataInteroperability Digital object management Structural metadataNavigation Markup languagesNavigation Enhancing content 4/12/10 S504 Spring 2010 4

5. How metadata is used 4/12/10 5 S504 Spring 2010

6. Creating descriptive metadata Digital library content management systems  CONTENTdm CONTENTdm  ExLibris Digitool ExLibris Digitool  Greenstone Greenstone  DSpace DSpace Library catalogs Spreadsheets & databases Directly in XML (generally not recommended) 4/12/10 6 S504 Spring 2010

7. Creating other types of metadata Technical  Generated by and stored in content management system  Stored in separate Excel spreadsheet Structural  Created and stored in content management system  METS XML GIS  Using specialized software Content markup  In XML 4/12/10 7 S504 Spring 2010

8. Levels of control Data structure standards (e.g., MARC, MODS) Data content standards (e.g., AACR2r, RDA) Encoding schemes  Vocabulary (a.k.a. controlled vocabularies)  Syntax High-level models (e.g., FRBR, DCAM) 4/12/10 8 S504 Spring 2010

9. Descriptive metadata 4/12/10 S504 Spring 2010 9 Purpose  Discovery  Description to support use and interpretation Some common general schemas  MARC  MARCXML  MODS  Dublin Core LOTS of domain-specific schemas

10. MODS 4/12/10 S504 Spring 2010 10 “Metadata Object Description Schema” Developed and maintained by the Library of Congress Network Development and MARC Standards Office For encoding bibliographic information Influenced by MARC, but not equivalent Quickly gaining adoption

11. Dublin Core (1) 4/12/10 S504 Spring 2010 11 “Core” across all knowledge domains National and international standard  2001: Released as ANSI/NISO Z39.85ANSI/NISO Z39.85  2003: Released as ISO 15836ISO 15836 No element required All elements repeatable 1:1 principle

12. Dublin Core (2) 4/12/10 S504 Spring 2010 12 Two “flavors”  Unqualified – 15 elements  Qualified  Additional elements  Element refinements  Encoding schemes (vocabulary and syntax)  All qualifiers must follow “dumb-down” principle Unqualified DC required for sharing metadata via the Open Archives Initiative Protocol for Metadata HarvestingOpen Archives Initiative Protocol for Metadata Harvesting

13. DCMI Abstract Model 4/12/10 S504 Spring 2010 13 New direction for the Dublin Core Metadata Initiative An “information model which is independent of any particular encoding syntax” RDF-inspired, but not RDF DCMI resource model DCMI description set model DCMI vocabulary model Full abstract model recommendationabstract model recommendation Still too early to really know where this is going

14. Comparing descriptive metadata formats 4/12/10 S504 Spring 2010 14 MARC [example]example MARCXML [example]example MODS [example]example Dublin Core [DC example]DC example [QDC example]QDC example Record format Binary (ISO 2709) XML RDF, XML, HTML, et al. Field labels Numeric Text Reliance on AACR Strong ImpliedNone Common method of creation By specialists By derivation By specialists and by derivation By novices and by specialists

15. Data content standards 4/12/10 S504 Spring 2010 15 Anglo-American Cataloging Rules, 2 nd edition (AACR2)AACR2 Resource Description and Access (RDA)RDA  Actually in some sense also a set of “properties” (which are not quite elements)  Intention is “principles” rather than “rules” Describing Archives: A Content Standard (DACS)DACS Cataloging Cultural Objects (CCO)CCO Also many format-specific guidelines  Descriptive Cataloging of Rare Materials (DCRM) series  Archival Moving Image Materials: A Cataloging Manual  Betz: Graphic Materials  …

16. Vocabulary encoding schemes 4/12/10 S504 Spring 2010 16 TGM I TGM II TGN GeoNet AAT LCSH LCNAF DCMI Type MIME Types …etc. aka, controlled vocabularies

17. Syntax encoding schemes 4/12/10 S504 Spring 2010 17 Essentially, “data types”  ISO8601  W3CDTF  URI  …etc.

18. Technical metadata 4/12/10 S504 Spring 2010 18 For recording technical aspects of digital objects Of use for long-term maintenance of data Some examples:  NISO Z39.87: Data Dictionary – Technical Metadata for Digital Still Images & MIX NISO Z39.87: Data Dictionary – Technical Metadata for Digital Still Images MIX  Schema for Technical Metadata for Text Schema for Technical Metadata for Text

19. Structural metadata 4/12/10 S504 Spring 2010 19 For creating a logical structure between digital objects  Locating the same intellectual content on multiple representations  Noting points of interest within a single resource  Grouping and sequencing multiple files that make up a logical whole METS is the current primary schema METS

20. 4/12/10 S504 Spring 2010 20 What is FRBR? Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records 1998 report from IFLA Conceptual model describing the entities and relationships underlying bibliographic information  Not a data model  Not an element set  Not a record format The basis of concepts and terminology for RDA

21. 4/12/10 S504 Spring 2010 21 FRBR user tasks Bibliographic records exist to help users:  Find  Identify  Select  Obtain …various entities

22. w1 Franz Schubert's Trout quintet -e1 the composer's score -e2 a performance by the Amadeus Quartet and Hephzibah Menuhin on piano -e3 a performance by the Cleveland Quartet and Yo-Yo Ma on the cello -.... w1 Ronald Hayman's Playback -e1 the author's text edited for publication -m1 the book published in 1973 by Davis-Poynter -i1 copy autographed by the author w1 Harry Lindgren's Geometric dissections -e1 original text entitled Geometric dissections -m1 the book published in 1964 by Van Nostrand -e2 revised text entitled Recreational problems in geometric dissections.... -m1 the book published in 1972 by Dover The core of FRBR: Group 1 Entities 4/12/10 S504 Spring 2010 22 WORK EXPRESSION MANIFESTATION ITEM is realized through is embodied in is exemplified by “the physical embodiment of an expression of a work” “the intellectual or artistic realization of a work” “a distinct intellectual or artistic creation” “a single exemplar of a manifestation”

23. 4/12/10 S504 Spring 2010 23 Other FRBR entities Group 2 (those responsible for Group 1 entities)  Person  Corporate body Group 3 (subjects of Works)  Concept  Object  Event  Place

24. 4/12/10 S504 Spring 2010 24 WorldCat’s FRBRization – it’s a start.

25. But that’s not all! Functional Requirements for Authority Data (FRAD)  Published in 2009  Adds some new attributes to existing FRBR entities  Adds Group 2 entity Family  Adds entities Name and Identifier  Adds entities Controlled Access Point, Agency, and Rules Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data (FRSAD)  Draft issued in 2009  Gets rid of Concept/Object/Event/Place  In favor of Thema and Nomen Unclear if these will have the same status as the first FRBR report 4/12/10 S504 Spring 2010 25

26. FRBR in RDA Uses FRBR entities strictly but not relationships and attributes Fairly loose interpretation of many features of FRBR Structured according to FRBR principles  e.g., “Section 1 - Recording attributes of manifestation and item” RDA “elements” for each of the FRBR entities being registered as RDF properties  Entirely new purpose for RDA, separate from its role as cataloging rules  Idea is to promote re-use of RDA metadata outside of libraries  Especially in Semantic Web applications  If it works, might show if FRBR principles are useful to non-library communities  We have no idea yet if this is going to work 4/12/10 S504 Spring 2010 26

27. Further information 4/12/10 S504 Spring 2010 27 jenlrile@indiana.edu These presentation slides: http://www.dlib.indiana.edu/~jenlrile/presentations/slis/ 10spring/s504/s504.ppt Metadata librarians listserv: http://metadatalibrarians.monarchos.com