Metadata Call 2021-05-25

Time: 2:00pm-3:00pm Eastern

Call-In Info:
Community Notes:

Moderator(s): Nora Z.

Notetaker: Julie Hardesty


  • Julie Hardesty (Indiana University)

  • Anna Goslen (UNC-Chapel Hill)

  • Nora (Egloff) Zimmerman (Lafayette College)

  • Cara Key (Oregon State University)

  • Annamarie Klose (Ohio State University)

  • Ryan Wick (Oregon State University)



  • Subgroup Reports

    • URI Selection Working Group - no update

  • Roadmaps Alignment Group Update (Julie H.)

    • Have been reaching out to partner institutions and other implementers, with the intention of sharing back to partners about roadmap planning.  Specifically are trying to identify code reclamation opportunities and strategies for increasing that.  

    • Repository Managers IG have a spreadsheet they’ve made of implementations and the Roadmaps Group has been reviewing this as well.

  • Issues/Questions

    • Anyone’s institution implement ASpace and do crosswalk activity between EAD and ASpace?

      • Annamarie Klose - OhioSU using Archivists Toolkit; using EAD metadata for Hyrax info on digital objects

      • Julie Hardesty - IU using Archives’ Space; Use ArcLight for digital objects

      • Anna Goslen - UNC Chapel Hill getting metadata from EAD for digital objects, this is in non-Hyrax applications. Difficulty keeping the repository and ASpace in sync

      • Balance between trying to describe digital object based on what is available (or not) in EAD - more discussions would be helpful!

      • Ryan Wick - U of Oregon using Aspace; OregonSU going to ASpace and Arclight probably as well

      • Keeping data in sync between Aspace/EAD and digital object description

      • Bulkrax - Lafayette and IU both using this in Hyrax app; not good for updating right now

        • OhioSU doesn’t use Bulkrax, has own tool for bulk import

      • What is most useful metadata for digital object vs finding aid description?

  • Discussion Topics

    • Continued from last month’s meeting, Hyrax issue review: help prioritize open issues that are labeled ‘metadata’

      • Work through the remaining 4 open 3.x issues labeled ‘metadata’


          • Can get around this issue with a local change but sometimes admin set IDs will show up in views

          • Could change predicate being used but has to be applicable to already existing content - would need upgrade path

          • Long conversation on issue, might need to investigate

          • Creating new repository, can change this predicate without problem

          • Upgrade path can be hard at scale for repositories that already exist

          • Need to determine current status of issue in existing Hyrax codebase - still using isPartOf?

          • What is recommended predicate? There are many suggested but nothing seems to be settled.  WG will evaluate possibilities in order to make a recommendation. 

          • Could use comment in config file to make recommendation 

          • Admin Set IDs will show on edit form and sometimes in public view if this problem is still in place

          • Isn’t part of Hyrax fields by default at this point


          • Stopped here, continue next meeting!

      • Return to question of Collection-level Rights Statements/ rights metadata, to make a recommendation

        • Can add license to collection but not rights statement

        • Adding rights statement at collection level does not auto apply that statement to each work in collection

        • Maybe rights statement should list rights statements used by Works in collection? Not sure how this would be implemented or viewed

        • If collection has license or rights statement, how is exception handled for work?

          • Could cause confusion if there is conflicting statements

        • If goal is to show makeup of works within, that is an available facet at collection level

          • Out of the box, Hyrax doesn’t supply facet for license or rights

          • Collection landing pages don’t have any facets either

        • Issue that reported this ( is for specific use case of mass digitization project

        • Collection editing form might need to explain that collection metadata doesn’t apply to Work metadata

        • Setting defaults and those can be changed, but for majority of use cases having a collection level rights statement doesn’t make sense

        • Bulkrax being able to update works would be better route to take to apply same rights statement to multiple works

        • Nora will respond to issue with this info

      • For each issue: is this still needed? Comments/context needed? Priority?

  • Next call: June 22nd, 2-3pm EST