Designing a National Standard for Discovery Metadata Improving Access to Digital Information in the Dutch Government

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Load more

CHILD POLICY This PDF document was made available from www.rand.org as a public CIVIL JUSTICE service of the RAND Corporation. EDUCATION ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT Jump down to document HEALTH AND HEALTH CARE 6 INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS NATIONAL SECURITY The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit research POPULATION AND AGING PUBLIC SAFETY organization providing objective analysis and effective SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY solutions that address the challenges facing the public SUBSTANCE ABUSE and private sectors around the world. TERRORISM AND HOMELAND SECURITY TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE Support RAND Browse Books & Publications Make a charitable contribution For More Information Visit RAND at www.rand.org Explore RAND Europe View document details Limited Electronic Distribution Rights This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law as indicated in a notice appearing later in this work. This electronic representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for non-commercial use only. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of our research documents for commercial use. This product is part of the RAND Corporation technical report series. Reports may include research findings on a specific topic that is limited in scope; present discus- sions of the methodology employed in research; provide literature reviews, survey instruments, modeling exercises, guidelines for practitioners and research profes- sionals, and supporting documentation; or deliver preliminary findings. All RAND reports undergo rigorous peer review to ensure that they meet high standards for re- search quality and objectivity. Designing a National Standard for Discovery Metadata Improving Access to Digital Information in the Dutch Government Jeff Rothenberg, Irma Graafland-Essers, Harry Kranenkamp, Abigail Lierens, Constantijn van Oranje, Rob van Schaik Prepared for Advies Overheid.nl and funded by the Ministry of the Interior and Kingdom Relations The research described in this report was prepared for Advies Overheid.nl and funded by the Ministry of the Interior and Kingdom Relations. The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit research organization providing objective analysis and effective solutions that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors around the world. RAND’s publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors. R® is a registered trademark. © Copyright 2005 Stitchting ICTU All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form by any electronic or mechanical means (including photocopying, recording, or information storage and retrieval) without permission in writing from the copyright holder. Published 2005 by the RAND Corporation 1776 Main Street, P.O. Box 2138, Santa Monica, CA 90407-2138 1200 South Hayes Street, Arlington, VA 22202-5050 201 North Craig Street, Suite 202, Pittsburgh, PA 15213-1516 RAND URL: http://www.rand.org/ To order RAND documents or to obtain additional information, contact Distribution Services: Telephone: (310) 451-7002; Fax: (310) 451-6915; Email: [email protected] Colophon General Client and policy accountability: Ministry of the Interior and Kingdom Relations (Ministerie van Binnenlandse Zaken en Koninkrijksrelaties; http://www.minbzk.nl/) Projectmanagement: Advies Overheid.nl (http://advies.overheid.nl/) Report written by: RAND Europe (http://www.randeurope.org), assisted by Gyata Management Consulting (http://www.gyata.nl) and Doxsupport (http://www.doxsupport.nl) Rights Copyrights of this document: Stichting ICTU (http://www.ICTU.nl) Stichting ICTU gives everyone a non-exclusive right to use the content of this document, taking into account the conditions mentioned below. By following these conditions you are allowed to use and copy the content of this document. The conditions are: • If using (parts of) the content of this document, always refer to the authentic source. • If using (parts of) the content of this document, always mention the date of extraction. • For annotation mention the following: Designing a National Standard for Discovery Metadata, Improving Access to Digital Information in the Dutch Government Report written by RAND Europe (http://www.randeurope.nl), assisted by Gyata Management Consulting (http://www.gyata.nl) and Doxsupport (http://www.doxsupport.nl) On request of the Ministry of the Interior and Kingdom Relations (Ministerie van Binnenlandse Zaken en Koninkrijksrelaties; http://www.minbzk.nl/) Copyright by Stichting ICTU (http://www.ICTU.nl/) Management and Control by Advies Overheid.nl (http://advies.overheid.nl/) The Hague, August 2004 i Designing a national standard for discovery metadata RAND Europe Preface This report, prepared for and funded by the Advies Overheid.nl and the Ministry of the Interior and Kingdom Relations (BZK), presents the results of a short project on the use of metadata (i.e., information that describes other information) to enhance the transparency of government in the Netherlands. The purpose of this project was to evaluate the risks and issues involved in introducing a nationwide standard for metadata to describe online government information in the Netherlands and to propose such a standard, based on the Dublin Core (DC) metadata standard, which has served as the basis for a number of similar initiatives in other countries. In addition to this report on the project itself, a Handbook was developed to motivate and explain the proposed standard to the government information providers for whom it is intended. The research project began 22 April 2004 and was to be completed 30 September 2004. This report presents the results of our analysis, organized according to the three major phases in which the project was conducted. The first phase examined the needs of government information providers, to enable us to understand their concerns and what a metadata standard should offer them. The second phase examined the Dublin Core and a number of other national metadata standards, to enable us to understand their capabilities and limitations and to propose a discovery metadata standard for the Netherlands. The third phase explored implementation issues that had emerged in the first two phases. Our conclusions and recommendations are drawn from the results of all three of these phases. The report should be of interest to information providers, such as website and database managers in government organizations at all levels. The research was conducted by a consortium under the leadership of RAND Europe (Leiden, the Netherlands) and included Gyata Management Consulting (Rotterdam, Netherlands), Doxsupport (Oosthuizen, Netherlands) and the RAND headquarters office in Santa Monica, California, United States. RAND Europe is an independent not-for-profit policy research organization that serves the public interest by improving policymaking and informing public debate. Clients are European governments, institutions, and firms with a need for rigorous, impartial, multidisciplinary analysis of the hardest problems they face. This report has been peer- reviewed in accordance with RAND's quality assurance standards (see http://www.rand.org/about/standards/) and therefore may be represented as a RAND Europe product. For more information about this report, please contact: [email protected]. ii For more information about this project, please contact: Advies Overheid.nl ICTU Nieuwe Duinweg 24-26 2587 AD Den Haag P.O.Box 84011 2508 AA Den Haag The Netherlands +31 70 8887850 [email protected] For more information about RAND Europe, please contact: RAND Europe Newtonweg 1 2333 CP LEIDEN The Netherlands +31 721 524 51 51 [email protected] iii Contents Colophon......................................................................................................................i Preface..........................................................................................................................ii Summary.....................................................................................................................ix SECTION 1 Introduction .................................................................................... 1 SECTION 2 Definitions....................................................................................... 5 SECTION 3 Research Approach .......................................................................... 9 SECTION 4 Phase I: Analysis of Dutch government data and metadata needs ...................................................................................................... 13 4.1 The Dutch and EU contexts ............................................................................14 4.1.1 Dutch projects related to metadata......................................................14 4.1.2 The Dutch regulatory context .............................................................15 4.1.3 The EU context...................................................................................17 4.2 Intrinsic metadata issues...................................................................................19 4.2.1 Tailoring metadata to different needs ..................................................19 4.2.2 Communities of Interest, supported by a national clearinghouse .........20 4.2.3 Encoding schemes and controlled vocabularies....................................21 4.2.3.1 Geospatial encoding schemes...............................................................22 4.2.3.2 Encoding schemes for Subject keywords..............................................23
Recommended publications
  • Metadata Demystified: a Guide for Publishers

    Metadata Demystified: a Guide for Publishers

    ISBN 1-880124-59-9 Metadata Demystified: A Guide for Publishers Table of Contents What Metadata Is 1 What Metadata Isn’t 3 XML 3 Identifiers 4 Why Metadata Is Important 6 What Metadata Means to the Publisher 6 What Metadata Means to the Reader 6 Book-Oriented Metadata Practices 8 ONIX 9 Journal-Oriented Metadata Practices 10 ONIX for Serials 10 JWP On the Exchange of Serials Subscription Information 10 CrossRef 11 The Open Archives Initiative 13 Conclusion 13 Where To Go From Here 13 Compendium of Cited Resources 14 About the Authors and Publishers 15 Published by: The Sheridan Press & NISO Press Contributing Editors: Pat Harris, Susan Parente, Kevin Pirkey, Greg Suprock, Mark Witkowski Authors: Amy Brand, Frank Daly, Barbara Meyers Copyright 2003, The Sheridan Press and NISO Press Printed July 2003 Metadata Demystified: A Guide for Publishers This guide presents an overview of evolving classified according to a variety of specific metadata conventions in publishing, as well as functions, such as technical metadata for related initiatives designed to standardize how technical processes, rights metadata for rights metadata is structured and disseminated resolution, and preservation metadata for online. Focusing on strategic rather than digital archiving, this guide focuses on technical considerations in the business of descriptive metadata, or metadata that publishing, this guide offers insight into how characterizes the content itself. book and journal publishers can streamline the various metadata-based operations at work Occurrences of metadata vary tremendously in their companies and leverage that metadata in richness; that is, how much or how little for added exposure through digital media such of the entity being described is actually as the Web.
  • Metadata Standards

    Metadata Standards

    Chapter 3 METADATA STANDARDS This chapter lists the major metadata standards in use or under development. Standards are subdivided into six areas: general, transportation models, educa- tion, media-specific, preservation, and rights. Each standard lists its official URL, sponsoring agency, community of use, purpose and goals, description, potential for information organizations, and key projects. General metadata standards General metadata standards are the most common, well-known, and univer- sally accepted schemas to date. Some are general and meant to be used as universal or common-denominator standards; others are for specific communi- ties with specific information resources. Most of the metadata standards listed here have emerged as practical applications in use, or will probably emerge as the most commonly applied standards, due to broad international support, history and development, or industry application and acceptance. Dublin Core Metadata Initiative (DCMI) http://dublincore.org The Dublin Core Metadata Initiative (DCMI) is managed by an international board of trustees, but most of the direction and maintenance of the standard has been led by the Online Computer Library Center (OCLC) in Dublin, Ohio. Community of use Library Technology Reports Librarians, Web content providers, Web resource creators, metadata creators, and general public. Purpose and goals Dublin Core assists in the discovery and description of Web and electronic resources. It is designed to provide a simple descriptive metadata standard extensible to Web resources of any format or subject domain. Description www.techsource.ala.org Dublin Core is a set of 15 core elements that assist in simple description and discovery of electronic resources. The standards basic principles are the reasons for its success as a viable common-denominator metadata standard for elec- tronic resources.
  • A Framework of Guidance for Building Good Digital Collections

    A Framework of Guidance for Building Good Digital Collections

    A Framework of Guidance for Building Good Digital Collections 3rd edition December 2007 A NISO Recommended Practice Prepared by the NISO Framework Working Group with support from the Institute of Museum and Library Services About NISO Recommended Practices A NISO Recommended Practice is a recommended "best practice" or "guideline" for methods, materials, or practices in order to give guidance to the user. Such documents usually represent a leading edge, exceptional model, or proven industry practice. All elements of Recommended Practices are discretionary and may be used as stated or modified by the user to meet specific needs. This recommended practice may be revised or withdrawn at any time. For current information on the status of this publication contact the NISO office or visit the NISO website (www.niso.org). Published by National Information Standards Organization (NISO) One North Charles Street, Suite 1905 Baltimore, MD 21201 www.niso.org Copyright © 2007 by the National Information Standards Organization All rights reserved under International and Pan-American Copyright Conventions. For noncommercial purposes only, this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means without prior permission in writing from the publisher, provided it is reproduced accurately, the source of the material is identified, and the NISO copyright status is acknowledged. All inquires regarding translations into other languages or commercial reproduction or distribution should be addressed to: NISO, One North Charles Street, Suite
  • Metadata for the Open Data Portals

    Metadata for the Open Data Portals

    Metadata for the open data portals Discussion Paper No. 6, December 2016, Joined-up Data Standards Project Beata Lisowska Data Scientist, Development Initiatives Contents Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 2 Platforms used for open data portals ...................................................................................... 3 Metadata standards .................................................................................................................. 4 Core metadata standards ........................................................................ 5 RDF Data Cube vocabulary .................................................................... 5 Dublin Core ............................................................................................ 5 Data Catalog Vocabulary (DCAT) ........................................................... 6 Other metadata standards ...................................................................... 6 Geographic metadata standards ............................................................. 6 ISO 19115 .............................................................................................. 6 Open data portals and metadata ............................................................................................. 8 Socrata and CKAN ................................................................................... 8 DKAN .......................................................................................................
  • Semantic Web: a Review of the Field Pascal Hitzler Hitzler@Ksu.Edu Kansas State University Manhattan, Kansas, USA

    Semantic Web: a Review of the Field Pascal Hitzler [email protected] Kansas State University Manhattan, Kansas, USA

    Semantic Web: A Review Of The Field Pascal Hitzler [email protected] Kansas State University Manhattan, Kansas, USA ABSTRACT which would probably produce a rather different narrative of the We review two decades of Semantic Web research and applica- history and the current state of the art of the field. I therefore do tions, discuss relationships to some other disciplines, and current not strive to achieve the impossible task of presenting something challenges in the field. close to a consensus – such a thing seems still elusive. However I do point out here, and sometimes within the narrative, that there CCS CONCEPTS are a good number of alternative perspectives. The review is also necessarily very selective, because Semantic • Information systems → Graph-based database models; In- Web is a rich field of diverse research and applications, borrowing formation integration; Semantic web description languages; from many disciplines within or adjacent to computer science, Ontologies; • Computing methodologies → Description log- and a brief review like this one cannot possibly be exhaustive or ics; Ontology engineering. give due credit to all important individual contributions. I do hope KEYWORDS that I have captured what many would consider key areas of the Semantic Web field. For the reader interested in obtaining amore Semantic Web, ontology, knowledge graph, linked data detailed overview, I recommend perusing the major publication ACM Reference Format: outlets in the field: The Semantic Web journal,1 the Journal of Pascal Hitzler. 2020. Semantic Web: A Review Of The Field. In Proceedings Web Semantics,2 and the proceedings of the annual International of . ACM, New York, NY, USA, 7 pages.
  • Resource Description Framework (RDF)

    Resource Description Framework (RDF)

    Semantic Web Technologies Resource Description Framework (RDF) Heiko Paulheim Semantic Web – Architecture here be dragons... Semantic Web Technologies (This lecture) Technical Foundations Berners-Lee (2009): Semantic Web and Linked Data http://www.w3.org/2009/Talks/0120-campus-party-tbl/ 09/13/19 Heiko Paulheim 2 Overview • A brief history of RDF • Encodings of RDF • Semantics and principles of RDF • Embedding RDF in HTML – RDFa, Microdata, Microformats • RDF Tools • Examples for RDF in the wild 09/13/19 Heiko Paulheim 3 History: Metadata on the Web • Goal: more effective rating and ranking of web contents, e.g., by search engines • Who has created this page? • When has it been changed the last time? • What is its topic? • Which is the content's license? • How does it relate to other pages? 09/13/19 Heiko Paulheim 4 Metadata on the Web: Dublin Core • Developed in 1995 at a workshpo in Dublin, Ohio • 15 predefined tags • A widely accepted standard (ISO 15836:2009) • May be embedded into HTML: <html> <head profile="http://dublincore.org/documents/2008/08/04/dc-html/"> <title>Semantic Web</title> <link rel="schema.DC" href="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" > <meta name="DC.publisher" content="University of Mannheim" /> <meta name="DC.subject" content="Semantic Web" /> <meta name="DC.creator" content="Heiko Paulheim" /> <meta name="DC.relation" content="http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/" /> ... </head> <body> ... </body> </html> 09/13/19 Heiko Paulheim 5 Metadata on the Web: Dublin Core • Identifier • Creator • Format • Publisher • Type • Contributor
  • Metadata Developments in Libraries and Other Cultural Heritage Institutions

    Metadata Developments in Libraries and Other Cultural Heritage Institutions

    Chapter 1 Metadata Developments in Libraries and Other Cultural Heritage Institutions Abstract there were not many examples in the field. Much has happened between these LTR issues, not This issue of Library Technology Reports (vol. 49, no. the least of which has been the funding and creation 5) “Library Linked Data: Research and Adoption” focuses of new national and international organizations whose on research and practice related to library metadata. In goal is to bring together and publish the collections of order to more fully understand this world, we also need cultural heritage and memory institutions. Since 2007, to consider the work being done in the archival and LAM (libraries, archives, and museums) communities museum communities. In chapter 1, we lay the foundation have developed new cataloging and archival process- for our exploration in libraries, archives, and museums ing frameworks (e.g., RDA, DACS, and CCO) and are (LAM) and consider the role and impact of this work in keenly interested in exploring the impact of new infor- the broader world of the Semantic Web, linked data, and mation systems on user needs. In the library world, data-rich web services. This chapter starts by introducing this discussion has led to the BIBFRAME initiative and a model for understanding the component parts of meta- a focused effort to implement the Resource Description data systems and concludes by outlining the process for and Access (RDA) specification. In museum communi- creating and publishing linked data. ties, the International Council of Museums has updated the CIDOC Conceptual Reference Model (CIDOC-CRM) as well as the Cataloging Cultural Objects (CCO) speci- ReportsLibrary Technology Introduction fication.
  • Overview of Provenance on the Web by the W3C Provenance Incubator Group

    Overview of Provenance on the Web by the W3C Provenance Incubator Group

    Overview of Provenance on the Web by the W3C Provenance Incubator Group Semantic Web Activity World Wide Web Consortium http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/prov/wiki Special thanks to contributing group members: Chris Bizer, James Cheney, Sam Coppens, Kai Eckert, Andre Freitas, Irini Fundulaki, Daniel Garijo, Yolanda Gil, Jose Manuel Gomez Perez, Paul Groth, Olaf Hartig, Deborah McGuinness, Simon Miles, Paolo Missier, Luc Moreau, James Myers, Michael Panzer, Paulo Pinheiro da Silva, Christine Runnegar, Satya Sahoo, Yogesh Simmhan, Raphaël Troncy, Jun Zhao W3C Provenance XG http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/prov/wiki November 30, 2010 1 Outline Need for provenance on the web W3C Provenance Group: What is known about provenance in the community • Definition of provenance • Key dimensions of provenance • Use cases: Requirements for provenance • State-of-the-art and existing provenance vocabularies Towards a standard for provenance W3C Provenance XG http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/prov/wiki November 30, 2010 2 Provenance is Key in Open Information Systems (such as the Web) DB Local paper Blog Web site Blog <LaBlanca Headquartered-in Abbu-Dabi> <LaBlanca Exports-to-Syria> Human assessment <LaBlanca Sponsor Demonstration-Downtown-Kabul> <LaBlanca Headquartered-in Kabul> Provenance questions useful for information integration: • Who created that content (author/attribution)? • Was the content ever manipulated, if so by what processes/entities? • Who is providing that content (repository)? • What is the timeliness of that content? • Can any
  • GVP LOD: ONTOLOGIES and SEMANTIC REPRESENTATION Vladimir Alexiev, Data and Ontology Group, Ontotext Corp

    GVP LOD: ONTOLOGIES and SEMANTIC REPRESENTATION Vladimir Alexiev, Data and Ontology Group, Ontotext Corp

    GVP LOD: ONTOLOGIES AND SEMANTIC REPRESENTATION Vladimir Alexiev, Data and Ontology Group, Ontotext Corp CIDOC Congress, Dresden, Germany 2014-09-05: International Terminology Working Group 2014-09-09: Getty special session full version (HTML), short version (PDF, slideshare). Press O for overview, H for help. Proudly made in plain text with reveal.js, org0-reveal, org-mode and emacs. ONTOTEXT SCOPE OF WORK http://vocab.getty.edu Ontology development: http://vocab.getty.edu/ontology Contribution to ISO 25964 ontology (latest thesauri standard) Complete mapping specification Help with R2RML conversion scripts, contrib to RDB2RDF (Perl), rrx:languageColumn extension GraphDB (OWLIM) repository. Enterprise Edition (clustered) Sem app dev (customized Forest UI), tech consulting SPARQL 1.1 endpoint: http://vocab.getty.edu/sparql Documentation (100 pages): http://vocab.getty.edu/doc Lots of sample queries, incl charts, geographic, etc Per-entity export files, explicit/total data dumps Help desk / support Presentations, scientific papers SEMANTIC RESOLUTION & CONTENT NEGOTIATION All GVP, AAT and TGN URLs resolve, returning human or machine readable content through content negotiation (303 redirect). Eg about the ontology: http://vocab.getty.edu/ontology semantic URI, content-negotiated http://vocab.getty.edu/ontology.html page (application/xhtml+xml) http://vocab.getty.edu/ontology.rdf application/rdf+xml http://vocab.getty.edu/ontology.ttl text/turtle Eg about an AAT subject http://vocab.getty.edu/aat/300011154 semantic URI, con-neg http://vocab.getty.edu/aat/300011154.html page (application/xhtml+xml) http://vocab.getty.edu/aat/300011154.rdf application/rdf+xml http://vocab.getty.edu/aat/300011154.ttl text/turtle http://vocab.getty.edu/aat/300011154.nt NTriples GVP VOCABULARY DATA Scope includes: Subjects: Concepts but also non-concepts Obsolete subjects (and dct:isReplacedBy) Terms: plain (SKOS) & rich (SKOS-XL).
  • The Dublin Core Metadata Element Set

    The Dublin Core Metadata Element Set

    CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by ARMIDA@UniMi ANSI/NISO Z39.85-2001 ISSN: 1041-5653 The Dublin Core Metadata Element Set Abstract: Defines fifteen metadata elements for resource description in a cross- disciplinary information environment. An American National Standard Developed by the National Information Standards Organization Approved September 10, 2001 by the American National Standards Institute Published by the National Information Standards Organization Bethesda, Maryland P r e s s NISO Press, Bethesda, Maryland, U.S.A. ANSI/NISO Z39.85-2001 Published by NISO Press 4733 Bethesda Avenue, Suite 300 Bethesda, MD 20814 www.niso.org Copyright ©2001 by the National Information Standards Organization All rights reserved under International and Pan-American Copyright Conventions. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage or retrieval system, without prior permission in writing from the publisher. All inquiries should be addressed to NISO Press, 4733 Bethesda Avenue, Suite 300, Bethesda, MD 20814. Printed in the United States of America ISSN: 1041-5653 National Information Standard Series ISBN: 1-880124-53-X This paper meets the requirements of ANSI/NISO Z39.48-1992 (R 1997) Permanence of Paper. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data National Information Standards Organization (U.S.) The Dublin Core Metadata Element Set : an American national standard / developed by the National Information Standards Organization. p. cm. — (National information standards series, ISSN 1041-5653) “ANSI/NISO Z39.85-2001.” “Approved ... by the American National Standards Institute.” ISBN 1-880124-53-X 1.
  • METADATA GUIDELINES for DESCRIBING BORN -DIGITAL PROGRAMS – SEPTEMBER 2007 Preserving Digital Public Television

    METADATA GUIDELINES for DESCRIBING BORN -DIGITAL PROGRAMS – SEPTEMBER 2007 Preserving Digital Public Television

    METADATA GUIDELINES FOR DESCRIBING BORN -DIGITAL PROGRAMS – SEPTEMBER 2007 Preserving Digital Public Television PRESERVING DIGITAL PUBLIC TELEVISION RECOMMENDED METADATA GUIDELINES FOR DESCRIBING BORN -DIGITAL MASTER PROGRAMS FOR PRESERVATION AND DEPOSIT WITH THE LIBRARY OF CONGRESS AND OTHER DIGITAL REPOSITORIES REPORT PREPARED BY LEAH WEISSE AND MARY IDE , WGBH ARCHIVES WITH KARA VAN MALSSEN , RESEARCH ASSISTANT , MOVING IMAGE ARCHIVE & PRESERVATION PROGRAM , NEW YORK UNIVERSITY Audience: This report is an overview of descriptive and preservation metadata necessary for the long-term access of digital television program assets. For illustration purposes, there are references to WGBH examples of WGBH in-house metadata records mapped to national metadata standards. SUMMARY In recent years, public broadcasting stations have found increasing value in retaining and efficiently managing their own master programs and associated production elements. There are a variety of reasons for this, including: New platforms for the re-broadcast of master programs; The potential re-use of program content for new productions; The use of content for websites or other educational materials; Research by journalists, scholars, educators, and historians; The sale of original footage content and a growing awareness of programs and related production elements as historical resources for scholarly and educational research. Public television stations have tended to establish their own policies and procedures for collecting and managing production assets in analog formats. With the growth of digital editing capabilities, the advent of digital file transmission for over-the-air broadcasts and new cable broadcast opportunities, many stations have recognized the need to better organize and standardize methods for managing their digital asset collections as well.
  • Observations on the Catalogers' Role in Descriptive Metadata Creation In

    Observations on the Catalogers' Role in Descriptive Metadata Creation In

    Collections and Technical Services Publications and Collections and Technical Services Papers 2006 Observations on the Catalogers’ Role in Descriptive Metadata Creation in Academic Libraries Jeanne M.K. Boydston Iowa State University, [email protected] Joan M. Leysen Iowa State University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/libcat_pubs Part of the Library and Information Science Commons The ompc lete bibliographic information for this item can be found at http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/ libcat_pubs/54. For information on how to cite this item, please visit http://lib.dr.iastate.edu/ howtocite.html. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Collections and Technical Services at Iowa State University Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Collections and Technical Services Publications and Papers by an authorized administrator of Iowa State University Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Observations on the Catalogers’ Role in Descriptive Metadata Creation in Academic Libraries Abstract This article examines the case for the participation of catalogers in the creation of descriptive metadata. Metadata creation is an extension of the catalogers’ existing skills, abilities and knowledge. As such, it should be encouraged and supported. However, issues in this process, such as cost, supply of catalogers and the need for further training will also be examined. The uthora s use examples from the literature and their own experiences in descriptive metadata creation. Suggestions for future research on the topic are included. Keywords metadata, cataloging, digitization, cataloger’s role Disciplines Library and Information Science Comments This is a post-print of an article from Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 45, no.