/
Descriptive Metadata Call 2016-03-16

Descriptive Metadata Call 2016-03-16

By Bill Branan
Jun 16, 2017

Time: 1:00pm EDT / 10:00am PDT 

Call-In Info: Google Hangout: https://plus.google.com/hangouts/_/g2jey2y5cjcnggkmymxziudmw4a 

New Hangout Link: https://hangouts.google.com/call/bat5imirxfdzbkeq23uze2ljzae

*Please note: We had some technical difficulties. Apologies if you were unable to join. There is now a new meeting link.

Moderator:  mcmillwh (Univ of Cincinnati)

Notetaker: 

Attendees:

Agenda:Metadata data modeling 

  1. Review of specific usage questions; see: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1YnunRMNS9T6j7cgsYFxqMPZoTvyGY-ZofZvdFGAykb8/edit?usp=sharing (updated to spreadsheet)
    Note: For background on UCSD/UCSB data modeling, see notes from last call:  Descriptive Metadata Call 2016-03-02
    1. We decided a spreadsheet would be used to collect initial info on pain points in data models 
      1. Each issue will have a row and each institution will be a column and can use that space to indicate how they are addressing the issue
      2. column B is for the properties/predicates/fields referred to or related to the issue in column A
        1. e.g. Modeling dates is the issue and the related properties/predicates/fields column could indicate whether this refers to temporal coverage or date information related to events
          1. See http://perio.do/ 
    2. Over this week and the next we'll start looking at the spreadsheet
  2. Timeline for intellectual development of data model (can be very vague; is this a 2 month, 6 month activity, etc.)
    1. We're still in exploratory stages and pain point discussions will let us know if there is value in developing a model
    2. regardless of the actual deliverable of this endeavor, we can plan on a presentation at the October HydraConnect
      1. may just be a breakout session or proposal to discuss our findings
    3. We need to see what comes of our current work in order to determine what the end product of our work will be
      1. This will enable us to establish a rough timeline
  3. Other items?
    1. Corey noticed that the UCSD model has a lot of BIBFRAME in it 
      1. there are also some thing BIBFRAME might be able to cover, but is not currently
      2. BIBFRAME Lite 
        1. experimenting with profiles and extensions to BIBFRAME
          1. e.g. Defines a set of archival material classes and properties as well as other sub-categories
        2. developing in parallel tracks to LoC BIBFRAME
        3. they're interested in gaps that might be relevant to the Hydra community
          1. Corey will share the UCSD model (noting that it's a work in progress) with Zepheira and bring their feedback to our next meeting
  4. The next meeting will be on 3/30/2016 at 1pm EST



Related content