Descriptive Metadata Call 2015-05-27

Time: 1pm EDT / 10am PDT

Call-In Info: Google Hangout: 

Moderator: Carolyn Hansen (U of Cincinnati)

Notetaker: Kelcy Shepherd


  • Arwen Hutt (UCSD)
  • Chrissy Rissmeyer (UC Santa Barbara)
  • Steven Folsom (Cornell University)
  • Esmé Cowles (UC San Diego)
  • Danny Pucci (Boston Public Library)
  • Corey Harper (New York University)
  • Eric James (Yale University)
  • Jenn Colt (Cornell University)


  1. Sufia Sprint (see notes after agenda)
    1. What descriptive fields should be at work level and what should be at file level?
    2. Should work and file have different list of resource types? Files could be things like image or poster, but genre-based (conference proceeding, journal article) might be better at work level
  2. Metadata Survey
    1. Scope
    2. Workflow and Timeline
  3. Next Steps


Sufia Sprint

Notes from Sufia Sprint meeting on descriptive metadata (2015-05-05):

  • For sprint, stick with Sufia required fields:
    • Title - require title at work level and allow file title to be editable, but file name will be default file title
    • Creator - creator required at file but not at work; if work has creator, then any subsequently added files could have that creator offered as suggestion
    • Keywords - keywords required on work only; files will only be uploaded as part of work for this sprint
    • Rights - rights are assigned at work level and files below use those same rights
    • Resource Type - just at file level but later there might be separate resource type at work level
  • Metadata Standard - keep with DC as Sufia does now, knowing that people will want to customize that later and Hydra Descriptive Metadata Subgroup might recommend a different model (based on DPLA or some other major profile)
  • If anything in a file is edited/moved, the work record is shown as step in workflow to complete file edits

List of Hydra Partners

  • Boston Public
  • Case Western
  • Columbia
  • Cornell
  • Data Curation Experts
  • DPLA
  • Duke
  • Duoc UC
  • DuraSpace
  • Indiana U
  • London School of Economics
  • Northwestern
  • Notre Dame
  • Penn State
  • Princeton
  • Oregon State
  • Rock and Roll Hall of Fame
  • Royal Library of Denmark
  • Stanford
  • Tufts
  • U of Alberta
  • U of Cincinnati
  • U of Hull
  • U of Oregon
  • UVa
  • Virginia Tech
  • WGBH
  • Yale

List of Known Hydra Implementers

  • New York University
  • UC San Diego
  • UC Santa Barbara
  • additional known implementers


Sufia Sprint Metadata Needs

What is this group’s work on the Sufia Sprint? Discussion of how to handle creator; at what level (e.g., file, component) should metadata live; potential need to separate technical metadata, which needs to be attached to a file from descriptive metadata. Sufia has generic work and generic object models. What metadata should be at the top level object, and on child level objects?

Metadata Survey

At last meeting discussed creating user stories based on survey results. The scope of the survey is hydra users, not end users. Discussion at the larger metadata group led to suggestion that we should work with user interfaces group to make sure we are including interface considerations. This could be through a joint meeting, having them give input on the survey, and/or having them fill out the survey. Corey will contact to that group to ask how they’d like to provide input.

High level topics to include in the survey:

  • Standards being used (schema, encoding, controlled vocabularies)
  • Where is metadata coming from? (Is it being created in Hydra or brought in? If brought in, in what record formats and from what systems? Is anyone bringing in metadata through harvesting?)
  • Any local fields?
  • Export formats/targets
  • Institutional profile (type of institution, etc.)
  • Who’s creating metadata?
  • Aspirational goals
  • Roadblocks
  • What level of API do people want to interact with?
  • What kind of documentation do people have?
  • How are people using controlled vocabularies – techniques as well as standards


  • Will use Google Forms
  • Preliminary draft Monday, June 15
  • Carolyn will create a Google doc, all should contribute to questions
  • Will give people 2 weeks to fill out surveys – responses due June 29th
  • Create user stories in July