Date

02 Mar 2016

Link to join Hangout: https://plus.google.com/hangouts/_/calendar/dmlsbGVyZWFsQGdtYWlsLmNvbQ.43lla0mm962pt9c0apfa3n09p4

Attendees

Goals

Review spreadsheet with initial suggestions for baseline technical metadata properties for audio and video objects

Discussion items

Time	Item	Who	Notes
5 min	Review Julie's HydraDAM2 spreadsheet? How it came about and what it documents
15 min	Review technical metadata properties suggested so far.		• Imagining we will need to do some offline work and circle back around to review in a couple weeks?

Julie talking about spreadsheet -- looking for a/v properties that would be above and beyond what Hydra metadata profile is offering https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/12W5aqE68xZh5SW7Vzr04uzR8-rMKE3r4_UR7M-RTXCo/edit#gid=0 edits to PBCore source information, tweaking where information would come from for File Name and Format Name in particular

Steven: how does essence track information work with this stuff?

Julie: the focus for the HydraDam2 system is just technical metadata about what the file is, not content

Steven: but is it being modeled into video and audio streams?

Julie: at this point the HydraDam2 system is just paying attention to what files are there and what technical information there is about the files, doesn't have expectations about what different types of objects will contain in them

Steven: talking about container/wrapper vs. essence files, slightly more complicated than examples for baseline application profile

Hannah: Stanford thoughts, includes information being found in mediainfo that would be valuable to manage as tech metadata

Steven: trying to figure out how broken down do container and streams need to be at this stage -- how much do we need right now? How deep should content-specific examples go for the working group?

Julie: getting into some video and audio-specific techmd that wouldn't be part of a baseline application, but the only things being brought into this list are things common between what WGBH and IU are capturing -- so not showing things that aren't in the common list Steven: how about everyone put their institution-specific properties, data properties that they want and then try to merge those?

Rebecca: will share PBCore-EBUCore mappings in the spreadsheet & do a compare from mediainfo Karen: Indiana and Penn State (?) are using EBUCore Julie: Indiana has definitely been reviewing EBUCore for mapping purposes. If we have questions we can also ask Jean-Pierre about EBUCore directly too

Action items

Create institution-specific tabs in shared spreadsheet doc with your required/recommended/desired technical metadata properties by March 16th! We'll be in touch to review over email.

Browser not supported