ИнфоРост
информационные технологии для архивов и библиотек
17 / 36

Metadata

"How do I describe thee? Let me count the ways: These collections have been described using many different standards throughout the years. The standards used by the partner institutions include: Encoded Archival Description (EAD) with DACS as the model for description for archival collections in the United States; ISAD(G) for archival collections in the United Kingdom; MARC for bibliographic, map, serial, and print collections; and Dublin Core employed for certain digital collections records. There are also collections that have been described using additional library and museum standards that need to be analyzed further. Luckily, most of these standards work well together because either they are international standards or there are established crosswalks.
I describe thee to the depth and breadth and height / My soul can reach, when feeling out of sight / For the ends of searching and ideal access: Key access points that I have highlighted as needing review include: subject headings; dates; languages; and place, personal, and corporate names. Syntactical inconsistency of these fields can lead to difficulties in the future when using a shared access platform. Names have proven to be particularly challenging as royal names can change throughout an individual’s life based on succession, titles, and changes in empire. Having only worked in American archival institutions up until this point, this is the first time I have encountered such complicated names.
I describe thee to the level of every day’s / most quiet need: The level of description between collections varies based on whether or not the materials are from archival collections or library collections. Many have item level description while some archival collections are described at the file or series level. The difficulties faced when trying to represent different levels of description in a shared digital library environment is something that has been explored previously by other archivists, most recently in Aggregating and Representing Collections in the Digital Public Library of America[1] published in November 2016."

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 Introduction ……………………………………………………………………….    3
1.1 Definitions ………………………………………………………………………...    5
2.0 Research Phase and Findings: Literature and Project Review .……………    10
2.1 Developing Recommendations .………………………………………………    15
3.0 Recommendations .…………………………………………………………….    17
3.1 Recommendations for representing objects
3.1.1 Aggregated objects………………………………………………………….    17
3.1.2 Item-level objects…………………………………………………………….    21
3.2 Recommendations for relationship of object to collection………………….    22
3.3 Recommendations for creating and sharing collection metadata………….    24
3.4 Recommendations for user interface changes………………………………    27
3.5 Recommendations for process………………………………………………    33
4.0 Conclusion………………………………………………………………………..    35
Appendix A: Bibliography…………………………………………………………….    38
Appendix B: DPLA Archival Description Working Group Charge………………..    40
Appendix C: User Scenarios……………………………………………………….    42
Appendix D: Metadata properties for User Scenarios…………………………..    47