[Web4lib] Metadata tools that scale

Thu Jan 25 17:58:51 EST 2007

Rutgers has developed a Workflow Management System that has service hooks
to Fedora, since we use that repository, but that will be platform
independent.  We are currently adding some functionality and robustness
under contract to the Library of Congress Motion Picture, Video and
Recorded Sound Division for use as a bibliographic utility by moving image
archives,  as part of the MIC projectr, although we, of course, use it for
every type of object.  Some of its cool features include an intuitive
mapping utility, a strong, event-based METS metadata schema, that we are
currently preparing as a formal METS profile, and we are developing an
export utility that will export MARC, PREMIS, PBCore and probably MPEG-7,
initially.  We plan to also design the export utility to work, as the
mapping utility does, to allow anyone to enter a schema they want to map
export to, and export to that schema.  We have a MARC import profile, so
we will have some standard export  profiles, but basically we want users
to export however they want.  Since this will be a bibliographic utility
for moving image archives, it is important that they can export in any
home schema, that may or may not reflect any national or international
metadata standard.

We are currently developing the faculty interface tool and we have some
exciting ideas for what we want to do in other areas, such as rights
management.  We will go open source before long, particularly since we are
committed to providing an open source package that can be downloadable
from the Library of Congress' MIC (moving image collections portal) site.

We are looking currently for a couple of co-developer libraries,
particularly among the Fedora community, because we think we have a good
core, but we have many more ideas for the platform than we have
programmers.  We're going to make the platform available to a select few
who are willing to commit some programmer time to developing areas of
interest to them, in collaboration with Rutgers and any other developer
libraries.  We think it is important,  now that the tool is relatively
stable, to have other eyes, and fresh ideas, reflected in the development.
 If anyone would be interested in considering this, please let me know. 
We are primarily interested in Fedora sites, because it is more
synergistic for us, but the open source product will be independent of the
fedora platform, as a bibliographic utility.

Grace Agnew
AUL for Digital Library Systems
Rutgers University Libraries

> I would agree with what Winona says and also want to put a plug in...
>
> For places considering what Winona is talking about, and who are
> sending someone to the upcoming code4lib conference, it would be nice
> to have a BOF on this topic and share ideas, experiences, etc.  I
> don't think there are BOF signups for the code4lib conference until
> arrival but, if you are interested in a general XForms/metadata
> editor/workflow solution, consider signing up once there.
>
> Also... I didn't go, but I hear there was some interesting work along
> these lines presented at the open repositories conference (still going
> on?) in Texas.
>
> Kevin
>
>
> On 1/24/07, Winona Salesky <winona.salesky at uvm.edu> wrote:
>> Hi Will,
>> I just started up a digitization center here at my institution (the
>> University of Vermont) and have been struggling with the same issues. As
>> far
>> as I know there is nothing out there currently that meets all your
>> specifications. I think some metadata creation tools are tied to the
>> Digital
>> Asset Management System you use (for example contentDM provides some
>> online
>> forms for entering Dublin Core, and I believe Fedora has some online
>> data
>> entry tools as well and also creates the structural metadata) so it may
>> depend on the DAMS you choose as well.
>>
>> For our system I wanted the a very flexible system because I knew we
>> were
>> going to be using METS, DC or MODS, EAD, TEI, and possibly other
>> metadata
>> formats later on. Because of our staff limitations we couldn't really
>> implement and customize a solution like Fedora so I ended up choosing a
>> native XML database for our DAMS (eXist) and have built the metadata
>> management side using XForms, which are web based and can be submitted
>> directly to the XML database. I imagine an XForms solution could be
>> integrated with several of the other library DAMS available.
>>
>> Here are some resources on Xforms:
>> WC3 intro to xforms
>> (http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Forms/2003/xforms-for-html-authors)
>> Orbeon (an open source solution to Xforms) (http://www.orbeon.com/)
>> Wikibooks Xforms (http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/XForms)
>>
>> I'd be happy to talk to you more if you have any other questions. You
>> can
>> also check out what I have been doing with XForms on my blog
>> (http://thedil.wordpress.com/).
>> Good luck!
>> -Winona
>> ----------------------------------
>> Digital Initiatives Librarian
>> The University of Vermont
>> winona.salesky at uvm.edu
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: web4lib-bounces at webjunction.org
>> [mailto:web4lib-bounces at webjunction.org] On Behalf Of Will Sexton
>> Sent: Tuesday, January 23, 2007 2:59 PM
>> To: web4lib at webjunction.org
>> Subject: [Web4lib] Metadata tools that scale
>>
>> I'm participating in a group that's looking at the digitization program
>> here
>> at Duke U. Libraries.  The topic brings with it a wide range of
>> questions,
>> but one that we return to often relates to the lack of a suitable
>> metadata
>> tool.  In the past, our approach to creating metadata has mostly
>> involved
>> one-off development in platforms like FileMaker and Office (Access,
>> Excel).
>> Experience has made me extremely averse to this approach, and in my
>> judgment, to have a digitization program that scales at all, we need
>> much
>> better support for metadata creation.  A suitable platform would have
>> the
>> following features:
>>
>> * authority control
>> * adaptability to diverse metadata schemas
>> * can be integrated with:
>>   - Digital Asset Management, for storing both metadata and files
>> resulting
>> from digitization
>>   - some sort of Content Management (i.e., for Web publication and other
>> modes of dissemination)
>>   - a tool for managing and tracking the digitization process, itself a
>> highly theoretical entity
>> * is web-based for distributed access
>> * provides for workflow management
>>
>> We ask ourselves, for these requirements, should we build or buy?  But
>> is
>> there even anything to buy?  How do others involved in supporting
>> digitization (and metadata creation, generally) deal with this issue?
>> Finally, does anyone have any wisdom to share which would contravene the
>> features list or other assumptions stated above?
>>
>> My sense of this question is that the options for "buy" (or "borrow", or
>> "steal", though "beg" may have some potential) are very limited.  But
>> it's
>> one point on which I'd be very happy to be proved wrong.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Will
>>
>> --
>> Will Sexton
>> Metadata Analyst / Programmer
>> Duke University Libraries
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Web4lib mailing list
>> Web4lib at webjunction.org
>> http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Web4lib mailing list
>> Web4lib at webjunction.org
>> http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Web4lib mailing list
> Web4lib at webjunction.org
> http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/
>