For my Introduction to Digital Libraries course I enrolled in this summer, our final project was to create a digital library with at least one collection containing at least ten cataloged items. The secret librarian in me was excited to put together a comprehensive repository of the higher education learning & development items I have been studying in my research. Both the project and course have concluded, but I am still working on editing and updating this digital library. There are a few more things I want to organize and catalog before I share it; however you can get an idea of what I’m compiling from this call for resources tweeted below. (p.s. I promise to blog about this digital library for higher education colleagues soon, so others can add and contribute to it.)
Are you #highered pro (staff/faculty/grad. student) with a blog, video channel, webinar collection, photo album, Twitter chat, etc. with a @CreativeCommons license on it? Let me know…I want to include it in a digital library I’m building. https://t.co/isbD4ZP8Yx pic.twitter.com/WM8ltDKsFq
— Laura Pasquini (@laurapasquini) June 24, 2019
https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
What has me STILL working on this digital library project are two things:
- Rights – This requires me to identify what is the copyright or rights OR to get permission. A number of items I found are accessible online; however few have explicitly listed it’s copyright (e.g. Creative Commons, Public Domain, or other) to designate the “rights” and permission to use for library cataloging standards; and
- Metadata – adding the required and recommended descriptive, administrative, and structural information for each digital object/resource I’m adding to the collections in this digital library.
There are no shortage of standards, acronyms for these standards, and protocols required to guide the shared use of these metadata standards. I’m not planning to launch a full lesson on ALL of these metadata standards, but rather share what I am working with and learning about for my digital library “in progress.” If you’re interested in checking out this full glossary and visuals about metadata, have at it with these brilliant Creative Common metadata maps/visuals created by Jenn Riley & Devin Becker:
Seeing Standards: A Visualization of the Metadata Universe
First, let’s define the term, metadata. It’s all around us! Some say it’s “data about data,” however this simplistic definition does not explain the complexity of what metadata does and how it operates in the world today. Monson (2017, pp. 88-89) better defines metadata as
“structured data that is associated with an information resource. It may be either created by hand or captured by a computer system… [and] can be described in terms of its functionality, which includes finding, identifying, sorting, selecting, gathering obtaining, and navigating items within collections of resources because it is structured according to certain sets of rule – purpose for search, discovery, browsing ,and collocation, identification and access.”
With ubiquitous technologies and connected systems of information metadata is all around us. Metadata helps us to buy books, find photos, and search for ALL THE THINGS! Formally known as “information in the library catalog” we now see metadata on a number of digital objects and things we use every day – music, podcasts, videos, books, phone calls, text messages, articles, websites, magazines, files, documents, and more. That being said, I don’t even want to think about the amount of data and metadata even being produced at this given moment — it IS exhausting (Pomerantz, 2019):
From cataloging digital objects, I have learned that metadata work should NOT be a solo project. Metadata creation should be a collaborative effort of people working together — just like we work today (Baca, 2016). This metadata creation process not only contributes to identifying items for a collection or to provide information for individual resources, but it also provides other perspectives and input as to how items will be found and shared. Monson (2017, pp. 89-90) shares the types of metadata required for each resource or object I have be cataloging:
Descriptive metadata: data that describes and objective. This is closely associated with the functionalities of searching and browsing to find the item, e.g. creator or author, title, data of creation, type of object, and subject or keyword associated with the object.
Administrative metadata: data that contributes to the management and administration of objects within a collection; this includes data such as data of digitization, type of equipment used to digitize, file name, and name of the organization that created the digital object e.g. pdf, mp4, mp3, jpeg, png
Structural metadata: how the items within a collection re logically grouped and presented on the screen; it provides information about the internal or “physical” structure of a digital resources, tied to components to form a whole. e.g. text, image, internet media type, StillImage, MovingImage
Metadata provides meaning as it offers explicit information about indexing, accessing, preserving, sharing [rights], and discovering digital resources. As we accrue a growing volume of digital information and objects, both online and offline, it is critical to have standards that offer ways for users to find, retrieve, and manage within our digital networks and overwhelmingly, complex information in our own evolving world. This might be from how things are classified to how the end user will find, navigate, and utilize this resource. I am using the Consortium Academic and Research Libraries in Illinois (CARLI), specifically this best practice for descriptive metadata in these CARLI Guidelines for the Creation of Digital Collections [PDF]. These were the suggested metadata standards recommended to guide our work from the original project, so I’m continuing to follow these protocols. This guide also follows a commonly used standard in many academic libraries, that is, the Dublin Core metadata scheme: https://www.dublincore.org/ which is similar to what is currently utilized at my own institution => UNT Libraries Quick-Start Metadata Guide. For each element that is “required” and “recommended” by CARLI (2017) that I am searching, imputing, and cataloging for EACH resource for my digital library, and a few of the “optional” elements that are available for each object:
|
Element |
Definition |
Example |
| Title
(required) |
A name given to the resource; this would describe or identify the file name or object | The OER Starter Kit
TOPcast: Teaching Online Podcast Research Shorts |
| Creator
(recommended) |
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource; this can be an individual, group of people, or organization/institution | Pasquini, Laura
TechKNOWtools, LLC University of North Texas |
| Contributor
(optional) |
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource; good if there is a team or group(s) making this item | Austin, Jane
Pixar Productions US Department of Education |
| Description
(recommended) |
An account of the resource; this might be the table of contents, abstract, overview, or “about” page/section of the object detailing what this resources is about | The Academic Advising (#AcAdv) Twitter Chat discussing advising and student support issues on Twitter every other Tuesday from 12-1 pm CST. We tweet with the hashtag: #AcAdv
YouTube Channel to disseminate and share scholarly work using whiteboard animations. |
| Publisher
(optional) |
An entity responsible for making the resource available; could be a publisher, platform, group, or individual. | WordPress
Journal of Comics and Graphic Novels MIT Press University of Guelph |
| Date
(recommended) |
A point or period of time associated with an event in the life cycle of the resource; created, valid, available or issued, copyright date, or date accepted/submitted | 2001-11-24
2018-05 1999 |
| Subject
(recommended) |
The topic of the resource; general information about the item, object, or resource | Indie band posters
Sustainable eating practices The Global Community for Academic Advising (NACADA) — History |
| Language
(required) |
A language of the resource (if applicable) | eng
spa fre |
| Type
(required)
|
The nature or genre of the resource; this would identify the DCMI type of vocabulary from the Dublin Core | Image, SillImage, MovingImage
InteractiveResource, Sound Dataset, Event, Physical Object |
| Format
(recommended) |
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource; extent | wav, mp4, mp3, jpeg, png
csv, doc, pdf |
| Coverage
(optional) |
The spatial or temporal topic of the resources, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resources is relevant | Texas (state)
Niagara Falls (waterfall) 1999-01-31 |
| Source
(optional) |
A related resource from which the described resource is derived, e.g. IBSN for books, or URL for websites | https://techknowtools.com/
9780349108391 https://flic.kr/p/XrroZS |
| Identifier
(recommended) |
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context; might be part of a bibliographic citation with a unique number scheme or code to the file. | doi: 10.9776/13527
978-0-9952692-1-7 http://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.7228223.v1
|
| Relation
(required) |
A related resource; it has version, is replaced by, replaces, is required by, requires, is part of; OR has part, is referenced by, references, format of, has format, etc. | Public Domain Picks (The New York Public Library)
Community Media (The Internet Archive) Miniature Book Collection (University of North Texas) |
| Rights
(required) |
Information about rights held in and over the resource; access rights; license pertaining to copyright and permission; open education resources will typically share with a Creative Commons license. | Permission is granted under a Creative Commons Attribution License to replicate, copy, distribute, transmit, or adapt this report freely provided that attribution is provided as illustrated in the citation below. View this license: http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License. Public domain |
We interact and create digital objects every day and with increased digital/information structures, we need to think about how we are naming, storing, and cataloging resources, especially in the digital. That being said, metadata also carries some consequences for that create a digital shadow to follow and track. With increased privacy and personal data concerns, it’s not just what the metadata information says, but also what and who is attached to this information.
It’s critical to consider what the metadata says about a particular collection. To make digital resources shareable, metadata gives these objects meaning in terms of the proper context, content coherence, standard vocabularies, and consistency (CARLI, 2017). Digitization and digital content does not necessarily mean equal access for all. Digital copies or making materials digital does not make these objects “findable, understandable, or utilizable to our ever-expanding audience of online users. But digitization combined with the creation of carefully crafted metadata can significantly enhance end-user access” (Baca, 2016). It is essential for metadata creators to consider how these classifications within the descriptive metadata is formed. We need to think about who is saying what about particular resources with the metadata schemes we use (Pomerantz, 2015):
This side project of mine is making me think more about metadata and how we classify information, data, resources, and objects in the digital age (or even how many of us do not). Don’t be surprised if you get a DM, email, or e-nudge from me asking you about permission/rights AND to give me some feedback on what I am creating. Knowing that the best digital libraries require collaboration, I will be reaching out soon to get your input, feedback, advice, suggestions, and contributions for this digital library. Back to my metadata descriptives and digital library cataloging for now, as I continue to learn and absorb these concepts.
References:
Baca, M. (2016). Introduction to Metadata, 3rd Ed. Getty Publications. Los Angeles, CA: Retrieved from http://www.getty.edu/publications/intrometadata/
Consortium of Academic and Research Libraries in Illinois (CARLI). (2017, January 9). Guidelines for the creation of digital collections: Best practices for descriptive metadata. CARLI Created Content Committee. Retrieved from https://www.carli.illinois.edu/sites/files/digital_collections/documentation/guidelines_for_metadata.pdf
Monson, J. D. (2017). Getting started with digital collections: Scaling to fit your organization. Chicago, IL: American Library Association.
Pomerantz, J. (2015). Metadata. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
