1. Metadata Working Group Charter Update Jennifer Carlino, Acting Chair FGDC OS/USGS 303-202-4260 jcarlino@usgs.gov June 13, 2012 Coordination Group Meeting 1

2. 2 Revision Process January 2013 – Metadata Working Group submitted draft Charter to Coordination Group April 2013 – CG voted to approve Charter with 2 comments to address May 2013 – MWG provided input on CG comments June 2013 – Present recommended language to address comments and finalize Charter

3. 3 Comment #1 From GSA: “...the Program will need alignment with other - non-geospatial- metadata standards efforts - especially federal ones. One can sort of read between the lines on this, but this reads as if the metadata concerns are limited inside the geospatial world, and I don't see it that cut and dry. I'd be more comfortable with some language to that effect, but can live with it as if the intention is there.”

4. 4 Results In Purpose, added “other related semantic and structural (e.g., non geospatial) metadata standards” In Purpose, added “Dublin Core Metadata Initiative (DCMI), Open Source Metadata Framework (OMF), Ecological Metadata Language (EML), and the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C).” In Authorities, added “the Digital Government Strategy and Open Data Policy” In Scope, added “other related semantic and structural (e.g., non geospatial) metadata standards”

5. 5 Comment #2 From NGA: “What about management (records management)?” It isn't addressed in the charter and our SME thought it was worth noting. Records Management will have additional metadata requirements beyond those required for discovery, access and use. This Records Management metadata should be integrated into the overall metadata model. Therefore, the FGDC MWG charter should include metadata support for Records Management in the scope."

6. 6 Results In Scope, added “other related semantic and structural (e.g., non geospatial) metadata standards” In Membership, changed to read: “The Metadata Working Group consists of representatives designated by the Federal agencies and draws from other FGDC Subcommittees and Working Groups.”

7. 7 For consideration EPA noted that the MWG might need a sub group to figure out what records management means and how the MWG might address it, if it’s applicable to the Working Group Question to the CG – if you want the MWG to address metadata relationships to records management, we need knowledgeable staff from the agencies to evaluate approaches and make recommendations. FGDC – OS can facilitate the process.

8. 8 Next Steps Agree on proposed language in draft Charter Finalize and post Metadata Working Group Charter on FGDC website

9. 9 Questions? Jennifer Carlino, FGDC OS/USGS 303.202.4260 jcarlino@usgs.gov