Module 3 Summary Notes
Milstead, Jessica and Feldman, Susan. (1999). Metadata: cataloging by any other name … [Electronic version]. Online 23:1, 25-31.
This is the EBSCOhost metadata on the above article, has 9 headings, not very sure if all of these would be Dublin Core element set, will have to have a closer look:
Online; Jan/Feb99, Vol. 23 Issue 1, p24, 7p
Provides an overview of projects for standardizing electronic resources. Information on metadata; Need for metadata; Creating metadata; Search engines and metadata; How metadata affects searching; Problems in the development of metadata.
Full Text Word Count:
Library, Information Science & Technology Abstracts with Full Text
And what is “metadata”? Various definitions seem to share a general consensus:
• “Metadata is data about data. It describes the attributes and contents of an original document or work” (Milstead and Feldman, 1999 p.26)
• “The simplest definition of metadata is " structured data about data." Metadata is descriptive information about an object or resource whether it be physical or electronic.” (http://www.dublincore.org/resources/faq/#whatismetadata)
• “Metadata is loosely defined as data about data. Metadata is a concept that applies mainly to electronically archived or presented data and is used to describe the a) definition, b) structure and c) administration of data files with all contents in context to ease the use of the captured and archived data for further use. For example, a web page may include metadata specifying what language it's written in, what tools were used to create it, where to go for more on the subject and so on.” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metadata)
Dublin Core Metadata Initiative (DCMI)
• Recent group (Ohio) 1997ish building a web standard to cope with electronic information packages / features simplicity, semantic interoperability, international consensus and extendibility ie: easy to use, moves well between languages, international agreements to use and ability to extend usefulness to just about any sort of info package (physical or digital)
• 15 elements: title, creator, subject, description, publisher, contributor, date, type, format, identifier, source, language, relation, coverage, rights
• 15 elements cover data to depth not always seen in brief/medium level AACR surrogates, and allow for electronic means of tracking, copyright issues etc
• There is structure, but not a rigid format for what elements MUST be there and in what order. Ie: DCMI is moving away from the ISBC rules ( such like RDA developed out of AACR2, and said to be divorcing from the oldest formatting rules)
• FAQ section at http://www.dublincore.org/resources/faq/ Very handy.
• Metadata for a resource often created by its authors at time of release onto web / implications: others apart from librarians’ profession interested in the keeping and retrieval of data, but many clashes (too many cooks)
• Example notes 6 elements, so … how many elements do you need before a resource is absolutely uniquely identified? I suspect most online resources may not need all 15 elements in the metadata entry for uniqueness to be established. However, because of software used to create and read the data and other electronic issues, metadata about electronic resources needs to be very, very informative – concept of “linked data” where interconnectivity of resource is made through its metadata to similar resources. A metadata surrogate is obviously so very much more powerful in its scope (information about information) than a “simple” MARC21 file!!