Search results

The purpose of this paper is to employ a case study of the Omeka content management system to demonstrate how the adoption and implementation of a metadata standard (in this case, Dublin Core) can result in contrasting rhetorical arguments regarding metadata utility, quality, and reliability. In the Omeka example, the author illustrate a conceptual disconnect in how two metadata stakeholders – standards creators and standards users – operationalize metadata quality. For standards creators such as the Dublin Core community, metadata quality involves implementing a standard properly, according to established usage principles; in contrast, for standards users like Omeka, metadata quality involves mere adoption of the standard, with little consideration of proper usage and accompanying principles.

The paper uses an approach based on rhetorical criticism. The paper aims to establish whether Omeka’s given ends (the position that Omeka claims to take regarding Dublin Core) align with Omeka’s guiding ends (Omeka’s actual argument regarding Dublin Core). To make this assessment, the paper examines both textual evidence (what Omeka says) and material-discursive evidence (what Omeka does).

The evidence shows that, while Omeka appears to argue that adopting the Dublin Core is an integral part of Omeka’s mission, the platform’s lack of support for Dublin Core implementation makes an opposing argument. Ultimately, Omeka argues that the appearance of adopting a standard is more important than its careful implementation.

This study contributes to our understanding of how metadata standards are understood and used in practice. The misalignment between Omeka’s position and the goals of the Dublin Core community suggests that Omeka, and some portion of its users, do not value metadata interoperability and aggregation in the same way that the Dublin Core community does. This indicates that, although certain values regarding standards adoption may be pervasive in the metadata community, these values are not equally shared amongst all stakeholders in a digital library ecosystem. The way that standards creators (Dublin Core) understand what it means to “adopt a standard” is different from the way that standards users (Omeka) understand what it means to “adopt a standard.”

An e‐mail survey was conducted by the Dublin Core Libraries Working Group to collect examples of Dublin Core use in libraries, and to provide input for the development of a Dublin Core application profile for libraries. A total of 29 responses were received from nine countries, describing 33 separate implementations of Dublin Core. The most commonly cited reasons for selecting Dublin Core were its international acceptance, flexibility and likelihood of future interoperability. Each of the 15 core elements was in use by between 59 percent and 97 percent of the projects in the survey. There was a high incidence (73 percent) of projects that use metadata elements in addition to the DC elements and approved qualifiers. The two most widely reported challenges involved in implementing Dublin Core were that there are too few elements and qualifiers, and the lack of usage guidelines.

The Dublin Core Metadata Standard was conceived illegitimately, had a troubled life, and has finally met its demise. Developed as a tool for online resource discovery, the standard waned after the arrival of Google. Because its fields were designed with a lack of specificity, Dublin Core suffered from nonstandard data elements and poor interoperability. Also, the poor organization behind the initiative contributed to its failure. Dublin Core will likely soon be replaced by an emerging standard, the Metadata Object Description Schema.

This paper seeks to describe efforts in the area of converting bibliographic records into Dublin Core from the Common Communication Format.

The paper provides examples of two mappings, one for unqualified Dublin Core metadata elements, and the other for qualified Dublin Core metadata elements.

Some difficulties may occur during the conversion of bibliographic records, and these difficulties are stated along with possible solutions.

The paper provides a methodology which would enable an algorithm to be developed for converting CCF‐based bibliographic records into Dublin Core metadata elements.

Recognizing changes in the information environment and related changes in cataloging standards, Catholic University of America’s LIS program adopted a strategy to offer students three levels of knowledge in organizing Internet resources. In the basic cataloging course, the instructor raises student awareness of Internet resources cataloging and metadata through demonstrations and discussions. In the advanced cataloging course, students apply cataloging standards and Dublin Core to Internet resources and selected types of material, and consider issues related to the implementation of metadata standards. In the advanced Internet resources organization course, students obtain hands‐on practice in creating electronic pathfinders and using metadata schemes such as Dublin Core, text encoding initiative (TEI), and encoded archival description (EAD). The instructor’s objectives are to broaden students’ understanding of the types of resources that need to be organized, give students knowledge and skills for the organization of digital resources, and prepare them to redefine cataloging in the twenty‐first century.

The aim of this research is to define a data model of theses and dissertations that enables data exchange with CERIF‐compatible CRIS systems and data exchange according to OAI‐PMH protocol in different metadata formats (Dublin Core, EDT‐MS, etc.).

Various systems that contain metadata about theses and dissertations are analyzed. There are different standards and protocols that enable the interoperability of those systems: CERIF standard, AOI‐PMH protocol, etc. A physical data model that enables interoperability with almost all of those systems is created using the PowerDesigner CASE tool.

A set of metadata about theses and dissertations that contain all the metadata required by CERIF data model, Dublin Core format, EDT‐MS format and all the metadata prescribed by the University of Novi Sad is defined. Defined metadata can be stored in the CERIF‐compatible data model based on the MARC21 format.

CRIS‐UNS is a CRIS which has been developed at the University of Novi Sad since 2008. The system is based on the proposed data model, which enables the system's interoperability with other CERIF‐compatible CRIS systems. Also, the system based on the proposed model can become a member of NDLTD.

A system based on the proposed model increases the availability of theses and dissertations, and thus encourages the development of the knowledge‐based society.

A data model of theses and dissertations that enables interoperability with CERIF‐compatible CRIS systems is proposed. A software system based on the proposed model could become a member of NDLTD and exchange metadata with institutional repositories. The proposed model increases the availability of theses and dissertations.

This paper seeks to study the metadata requirements for setting up a digital repository in ceramics resources that would provide researchers and ceramic art professionals with access to the information as per their requirements.

The paper first reviews and analyzes various metadata standards and formats already available. Open software (Greenstone) is used to develop the repository and the paper discusses its metadata provisions. Thereafter, the paper focuses on ceramics resources and attempts to determine the metadata elements required to describe and organize ceramic resources. Existing controlled vocabularies to standardize content metadata of the repository are also reviewed.

The paper finds that selected metadata elements of Dublin Core and Categories for the Description of Work of Art can be used to describe and organize the ceramics resources. Local qualifiers are added when necessary to describe the resources. As Categories for the Description of Work of Art metadata standards are not provided in Greenstone, these were defined using GEMS to describe and organize ceramic art works. It also found that existing controlled vocabularies are not sufficient to standardize the content metadata of the repository.

A digital repository should also contain information resources such as video and audio‐video information resources. The study has not considered studying metadata requirements to describe such information resources.

This paper could be useful for others who want to develop their repositories in various disciplines.

Google Scholar has difficulty indexing the contents of institutional repositories, and the authors hypothesize the reason is that most repositories use Dublin Core, which cannot express bibliographic citation information adequately for academic papers. Google Scholar makes specific recommendations for repositories, including the use of publishing industry metadata schemas over Dublin Core. This paper aims to test a theory that transforming metadata schemas in institutional repositories will lead to increased indexing by Google Scholar.

The authors conducted two surveys of institutional and disciplinary repositories across the USA, using different methodologies. They also conducted three pilot projects that transformed the metadata of a subset of papers from USpace, the University of Utah's institutional repository, and examined the results of Google Scholar's explicit harvests.

Repositories that use GS recommended metadata schemas and express them in HTML meta tags experienced significantly higher indexing ratios. The ease with which search engine crawlers can navigate a repository also seems to affect indexing ratio. The second and third metadata transformation pilot projects at Utah were successful, ultimately achieving an indexing ratio of greater than 90 percent.

The second survey is limited to 40 titles from each of seven repositories, for a total of 280 titles. A larger survey that covers more repositories may be useful.

Institutional repositories are achieving significant mass, and the rate of author citations from those repositories may affect university rankings. Lack of visibility in Google Scholar, however, will limit the ability of IRs to play a more significant role in those citation rates.

Transforming metadata can be a difficult and tedious process. The Institute of Museum and Library Services has recently awarded a National Leadership Grant to the University of Utah to continue SEO research with its partner, OCLC Inc., and to develop a toolkit that will include automated transformation mechanisms.

Little or no research has been published about improving the indexing ratio of institutional repositories in Google Scholar. The authors believe that they are the first to address the possibility of transforming IR metadata to improve indexing ratios in Google Scholar.

A new Danish legal deposit act has facilitated co‐operation in creation of a common application form for Danish Dublin Core including the basic fifteen elements and four subelements. The form is used for creation of metadata in government publications and as an application form for legal deposit and inclusion in the national bibliography.

This paper takes a chronological approach to the cataloguing of electronic resources within the National Library of New Zealand. It briefly outlines the early work in this area and then looks at how the role of a national library affects the cataloguing process. This is followed by a description of current approaches to cataloguing published digital materials and the transformation of the catalogue record that has been part of this process. Finally some issues that are still under discussion are outlined.