ALCTS / LITA Metadata Standards Committee Committee
Metadata Standards Committee
ALA Annual Meeting, Chicago
29 June 2013
Committee members present:
Éva Balcovac, Jenn Riley, Denise Bennett, Kevin Clair, Janet Lee-Smeltzer, Erik Mitchell, Bonnie Parks, Amy Rudersdorf, Jon Solomon
Continuing with our preference to establish goals with high and quick impact
a) Roadmap to Metadata: visualization tools, relationships, etc.
b) How do we fit with other groups, e.g. MARC Transition Interest Group,
c) define our role as:
education, advocacy, outreach
develop/publicize case studies, core competencies, best practices
Our charge still carries a component of bibliographic data, but what topics should we tackle? BibFrame is LC, not ALA; we're not positioned to move quickly; they’re not having enough open discussion -- so what could be our role?
Options for the education/advocacy/outreach function include:
1) How to get from MARC to linked data? A visualization (such as spaghetti in a bucket); other ways to facilitate the transition. Advocate for using new fields even if your local system doesn't support them yet. Encourage the coding of relationships and attributes. Many catalogers see the workload but not the added benefits, so we can educate on the future value and encourage folks to not lose sight of the benefit, which is the impact on the users in finding, identifying, and discovering.
2) Library as Publisher: reusability, linking metadata to get content to user
3) Linked data, as embodied by schema.org. Illustrate with case studies, mappings.
4) Applying RDA beyond the catalog; incorporating RDA into non-metadata felids, such as the 3xx.
5) Helping develop a mental model of interactions: where components begin and end, letting the pieces play together, interacting and connecting the modularities.
6) Poll or survey librarian to identify their biggest concerns.
7) Don't forget the technology impact -- we can't separate standards from the technology at our disposal. Include digital content, ILS, etc.
1) Could the committee facilitate individuals becoming involved in relevant standards development and implementation?
2) Or would it be more effective for committee members to state our role (even if modestly in our sigs) since participating as part of the group might have more impact.
3) ALA Committees may serve as liaisons to other groups (as opposed to “members”) without needing higher approval.
The ALCTS Standards Task Force report includes a list of relevant standards, so we don't need to reinvent.
Midwinter: invite PCC Chair to our meeting
Sponsor a joint ALCTS/LITA program next Annual
Speakers could focus on:
a) Schema.org, including LODLAM implementers
b) librarians involved in linked data (W3C): who's exposing, who's using, what's happening
If not accepted, we could try the Joint ALA/SAA/AAM Committee on Archives, Libraries and Museums (CALM)
ALCTS Metadata Standards Committee Conference Call 8/16/2013
Present: Amy Rudersdorf, Bonnie Parks (notes), Denise Bennett, Erik Mitchell, Éva Balcovac, Janet Lee-Smeltzer, Jenn Riley, Jon Solomon, Kevin Clair
Guest: Phil Schreur
- PCC punctuation report, with guest Phil Schreur
Follow up from Midwinter on PCC-ISBD punctuation report.
- Background: The original idea was to be able to include enough subfielding in MARC format so ISBD punctuation could be stripped out; however, it was recently announced that we are transitioning away from MARC21 to BIBFRAME. Beacher Wiggins suggested at PoCo that the ALCTS Metadata Standards Committee would be a good funnel to provide information to the BIBFRAME developers.
- The punctuation report is very much in sync with BIBFRAME with respect to removing ISBD punctuation. After discussion, the committee endorsed the removal of ISBD punctuation from bibliographic records. Phil agreed to investigate whether it is possible to add an addendum to the report with the committee’s conclusions.
- Jenn pointed out that ending punctuation is “low hanging fruit” that we can stop doing right away. The group discussed whether it might make sense to cease using ending punctuation immediately. Amy pointed out that ending punctuation causes problems when cross-walking. If we make this statement, it might have more impact in the metadata creation world.
Action: Jenn, Amy and Éva will work with Phil on statement with PCC responding to the report. Getting rid of punctuation -- removing trailing punctuation right away; the rest as we move to BIBFRAME.
- Session proposals for Midwinter and Annual 2014
Schema.org for Annual.
There should be a form on the ALA website (ALCTS or LITA), and it goes to the committee and they review it. Submit to both ALCTS (Amy) and LITA (Éva) for a joint proposal. If the proposal cannot be sponsored in person, we may consider an electronic presentation (Webinar).
- Consider a discussion at Midwinter rather than a Business meeting (conduct business via conference calls). Use our time for our business meeting for discussion instead. Agreed.
- Consider virtual ALA
- Get word out via email lists in early January.
- Ask for room space for 100.
- Prevent a time conflict. Jenn suggested that we figure out what groups we do not want to conflict with and propose a time to ALCTS. (MARC Advisory – Sat at 10:30, ALCTS All Committee- Sat at 8:30). We want a time on Saturday or Sunday with minimal conflicts.
- The group agreed to ask for Saturday 1-2:30.
Action: Jenn will contact Charles Wilt (ALCTS) and Melissa Prentiss (LITA) to work on time change.
- Getting started on some kind of visualization/relationship explanation output
- Goal: advancing understanding of non-MARC metadata with librarians involved in resource description metadata becoming more involved.
- Since we’re doing a program at annual, maybe we should have something deliverable coming out of the program? Using schema.org might be something fairly easy to do.
- Use the program as a way to get people excited about the topic – as a starting point.
How to raise knowledge and awareness:
- Programs, documents, examples. Consider our role to facilitate rather than to maintain it.
- Dh+lib (http://acrl.ala.org/dh/) that may be used as a model. Let’s harness other people’s time and energy.
- LC’s digital preservation blog is good - ‘The Signal’ (http://blogs.loc.gov/digitalpreservation/) offers different perspectives. Might be a good model
ALCTS/LITA Metadata Standards Committee
Midwinter Conference Meeting Agenda
January 26, 2014
Convention Center 119B
Please note: we will not be providing print copies of past minutes at this meeting. If you would like to have copies at the meeting, please retrieve them from the links in the agenda.
- Approval of past meeting minutes
- ALA Annual 2013 http://connect.ala.org/node/209733
- August 16, 2013 http://connect.ala.org/node/217578
- January 17, 2014 http://connect.ala.org/node/217223
- Planning for schema.org program at Annual
- Issues arising from BIBFRAME Forum at Midwinter
- Statement on PCC report on internal MARC field punctuation
- Planning for community curated metadata news/awareness site
- Discussion of further projects we should undertake
January 17 Meeting Minutes
Attendees: Eva Balcovac, Jenn Riley, Denise Bennett, Kevin Clair, Janet Lee-Smeltzer, Erik Mitchell, Bonnie Parks, Amy Rudersdorf, Jon Solomon
1. NISO CCM liaison
- Eva will remain formal liaison; need to find a replacement. Either way, the liaison must be a formal member of the NISO committee.
- She is going to work on establishing a formal relationship before her position times out on this committee after ALA 2014.
2. Following up with PCC about changing practices for MARC punctuation
- PCC Statement response felt language was too strong.
- Committee agrees that the language should be strong, but discussed slight changes to the statement. Willing to change slightly. Will go back to PCC and express our interest in a strong statement; unanimous decision from committee
3. Getting started on a community information sharing program
- Blogging / guest curators / Digital Humanities
- Create a blog similar to http://acrl.ala.org/dh/ (1600 twitter followers) where the "community" curates it. Committee members would not be responsible for curating it.
- Primary location for any committee outputs
- Midwinter: will continue conversation about what sorts of topics the blog would include, how it would be structured, etc.
4. Getting started on documentation demonstrating library and industry metadata relationships
- Leave this for Midwinter discussion
5. Agenda and logistics for in person meeting at midwinter
- Sunday, January 27, 1-2:30pm
- Need to formally approve minutes from this meeting and a few preceding
- Will send out an email to draft notes; won't bring paper copies
- ALA presenter suggestions (topic schema.org)
- Jason Ronallo: would be interested in presenting at ALA, but is working on securing funding from his institution.
- Silvia Southwick: Declined.
- Dan Scott: Eva will talk to him.
- Mark Matienzo: No.
- Tom Johnson (OSU): Bonnie.
- Chris Beer (Stanford) - also Greg Mercer (Graduate School of Business)
- Richard Wallis (OCLC)
- Kevin volunteered to take notes at Midwinter.
- Agenda for Midwinter
- Approve minutes
- PCC statement
- Annual presentation planning
- Blog discussion
- Other communication outlets needed?
- Issues arising out of Bibframe Forum
Meeting Agenda - Metadata Standards Committee, Saturday June 29, 10:30am, Hilton Chicago, Lake Ontario roomby Jennifer Riley on Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 02:29 pm
Metadata Standards Committee
ALA Annual Conference
June 29, 2013
Meeting place: Hilton Chicago, Lake Ontario
- Introduction of members
- Approval of minutes from January 2013 meeting
- Discussion about details on moving forward with our vision (Link to the Summary on: http://connect.ala.org/node/208991 as basis for discussion)
- Ideas for sponsoring programming at upcoming ALA meetings
- Additional comments and discussions from attendees
- Next meeting
ALCTS/LITA Metadata Standards Committee
Conference Call 5/10/2013
Present: Éva Balcovac, Jenn Riley, Denise Bennett, Kevin Clair, Janet Lee-Smeltzer, Erik Mitchell, Bonnie Parks, Amy Rudersdorf, Jon Solomon
1. Discussion of specific role our committee wants to take
We need to have strong, and clear relationships with other bodies, including NISO. We can utilize these to make connections between communities (eg with Onix) and help everyone understand how they relate.
Want to look at broad perspective, but also need to make the future relate to today. We can make a significant contribution in working out how libraries actually get to a point where eg RDF is useful for them, and getting from flat or tree-based metadata to graph based metadata. A focus on use cases and successes rather than systems will likely be more successful. A list of “core competencies” might be an activity to undertake.
We interpret our charge as inclusive of more than descriptive metadata – also metadata for rights management, preservation, images, authorities.
We might also consider an advocacy role for libraries with other groups trying to do this work.
Our charge has some specific language about metadata policy, related to reviewing, evaluating, and recommending approval. We need to figure out what it means for us to do this without it being a rubber stamp.
A major first work product could be documentation and visualization of relationships between major players and groups related to metadata, not just in libraries but in allied and related fields. Include libraries, publishers, standards makers, other stakeholders. It would be interesting to represent this in the Open Metadata Registry somehow. We would deconstruct the complex metadata environment to understand relationships between various groups and standards, and how they interoperate. Our big goal would be to use this information in order to take concrete steps towards helping the library community achieve the vision of future metadata that is currently taking shape. We’ll need to work with others to map out big ideas for how to get there.
With this in mind, we’ll likely want to approach ALCTS and LITA for a revision to our charge. We can present to them a clear statement of what we think we can do and do well.
2. Next steps
Set up a space to brainstorm, likely on ALA Connect or a Google doc.
Define specific deliverables, get input on this plan at ALA.
Run our ideas by ALCTS and LITA leadership.
After ALA, set specific tasks and timelines, and divvy up the work among the committee.