Descriptive Metadata Call 2016-03-02

Time: 1:00pm EDT / 10:00am PDT 

Call-In Info: Google Hangout: 

Moderator: mcmillwh (Univ of Cincinnati)

Notetaker: Arwen Hutt (UCSD)


Agenda:Metadata data modeling (Arwen and Chrissy)

  1. i. Collaborative project between UCSD and UCSB; definition of work; how do we share descriptive data models? 
    1. The initial plan of the UCSD data model was to have the following layers
      1. PCDM object - DC elements
      2. DPLA model
      3. local model
    2. After the meeting between UCSD and UCSB the plan is to have the following layers
      1. PCDM object - DC elements
      2. DPLA model
      3. community model - for shared elements between institutions
      4. local model - for elements unique to one institution
    3. There are many strong feelings about locally-generated metadata, so this will allow a common language to be spoken at lower levels while allowing each institution the extensibility it needs for local practices
      1. DPLA guides are great as a means to aggregation, but institutions need more customized elements
    4. Will allow code to be shared between environments with less need for customization
    5. UCSB and UCSD will develop the community model and bring it to the group for feedback
      1. there are some areas that many institutions are struggling with
        1. geographic
          1. distinguishing between the place a resource was created, is about, etc.
        2. temporal (dates)
        3. genre/type
      2. Corey reports that NYU found that many local terms could be found in BIBFRAME ontologies
        1. these are available to Ruby RDF
        2. can be declared in data streams easily
      3. in the current UCSD model, the local elements don't all have local predicates, they draw from external predicates when possible
    6. UCSD is in the process of developing the model, but nothing has been implemented yet. At UCSB, the code has been developed, but the model needs to be fleshed out
      1. we should look at the code to see how much repetition is needed in the code in order to implement the model
    7. NYU is trying to take all metadata models and pull them into a gem that can be plugged into various systems
    8. The group can start fleshing out specific usage questions
      1. Arwen will provide examples of geographic and temporal and we can discuss those
      2. others can add to examples provided
    9. Members of the group will upload their data models with problematic areas highlighted
      1. this will help us identify areas of overlap
      2. may also help with MODS group work (tier 4 as a MODS layer?)
    10. We should also look to BIBFRAME to see if it will solve some problem areas in this space
      1. if our needs are not met, those needs could be articulated to help guide development of BIBFRAME
      2. BIBFRAME Lite addresses geographic coverage and place of publication
    11. We won't come to an agreement about what we want to do, but if we can come up with a framework for how our models relate to other layers, this will help institutions share with peers. It will help express what's been done locally to a larger community.
    12. The conceptualization as tiers may create more options for application profiles, so there could be a research curation profile that may integration more fields for scientific research
       Group scheduling and hiatus
  1. Group Scheduling and hiatus

    1. No need for hiatus now as this is the kind of task we had discussed waiting for while on hiatus
    2. Next meeting is scheduled for Wed, 3/16
    3. Try to have models and/or problem areas posted for next meeting
  2. Other items
    1. Book Club - Semantic Web Modeling is now reading chapters 7-8
      1. Corey highly recommends the book
      2. Next sessions are March 14-15 - see the sign-up sheet posted on wiki page