1. Metadata for Special Collections
How to Improve Interoperability in CONTENTdm
ALCTS CCS Cataloging Norms Interest Group
ALA 2009 Midwinter (January 24, 2009)
Myung-Ja Han
Christine Cho
MJ: I changed 24th to 24

2. Background Why Do We Create Digital Collections?
- To Increase Access to Hidden Resources
Why Do We Share?
- Increases exposure of collections
- Broadens user base
- “We can no longer assume that users will come through the front door, sharing metadata gets us ‘in the flow’” (Lorcan Dempsey) from ‘Metadata for You & Me’

3. OAI-PMH and CONTENTdm OAI-PMH - Data Providers - Service Providers
Data is Harvested by a Set
Data is Harvested in Dublin Core

4. Methods 21 Collections from 15 Institutions - Find Unique Field Names
- Where the Field Names Came from
- How the Unique Fields were Mapped to Dublin Core
- What was Mapped and What was Not

5. Types of Collections

6. MJ: in my view the label for the x-axis was cut off - it says “Number of Elem”

7. Unique Metadata Fields
21 Collections Used 472 Fields
159 fields use Unique Names other than Dublin Core
116 Descriptive Metadata
35 Administrative Metadata
8 Technical Metadata
*40 elements were not mapped

8. Descriptive Metadata (1) - After Normalization
DC Element
No.
contributor 1
format-extent 10
coverage-Spatial 11
identifier 6
coverage-temporal 4
isPartOf 8
creator
publisher
date
source
date-created 3
subject
description
type 5
format
Not available in DC 22

9. Descriptive Metadata (2)
Not Available in Dublin Core
Objects, People/Place, Producer, ProperName, SeriesTitle, SourceSummary, Support, Technique, Style/Period, SubTheme, PerformanceTitle, ImageTitle, etc…

10. Administrative Metadata
Physical Location/Local Identifier – Box Number, Shelf Number, Item Number, CD Number, Negative Number, Location Folder, Folder Number, Record Group, Place Kept, Location Collection, Inventory Number, Image File Name, Car Plan Number…

11. Technical Metadata Color Profile Digital Reproduction Information
Digitization Note
Digitization Specification
File Resolution …

12. Lost Information Data Mapped Incorrectly
- Of the 159 Local Elements, 37 were Mapped Incorrectly
Unmapped Elements
- CONTENTdm Provides the Option to Not Map Local Fields to Dublin Core
MJ: I capitalized some of the words to match the other slides.

13. 10 (out of 21) Collections Had Unmapped Fields
Of the 40 Unmapped Elements, 9 Could Have Been Mapped to One of the Dublin Core Elements
- Examples:
Collection to <relation>
Date Written to <date>
MJ: capitalized some words…

14. Metadata for Special Collections
Need Special Elements from Different Metadata Standards to Describe/Manage Resources
- VRA Core
- CDWA
- ObjectID
- EAD

15. What We Have Found (1)
Describe Both Digital and Physical Resources within the Same Record

16. What We Have Found (2) Description is for EVERYTHING?!
- Many Local Fields are Mapped to <dc:description> including,
Theater Name, Repository, Original Format, Associated People, Inscription, English Translation, etc…

17. Descriptive, Administrative and Technical
Metadata were Mapped to <description>
- 27 unique local fields were mapped to
<description>
11 descriptive
8 administrative
8 technical

18. How to Create Metadata (1)
Think About Functional Requirements
- What should be used for Searching
- What should be used for Browsing
- What should be used Internally
Who are our users?

19. How to Create Metadata (2)
Simplicity
Extensibility
Interoperability
- from ‘Metadata (2008)’

20. How to Create Metadata (3) Include Recommendations for Classes of Data Elements (from ‘Shareable Metadata’)
Titles
Names
Dates
Subjects / Topics
Language
Geographic Places
Identifiers
Rights for Resources
Bibliographic Citations
Types of Resources

21. Suggestion for Exporting
What to Export?
- Data to Include
- Data to Exclude
Mapped to Qualified Dublin Core Elements, not Simple Dublin Core
Are We Exporting as a Compound Object or Item Level?
- Does the Collection consist of 9 books or 2987 Pages?

22. Suggestions for Field Names
Are Qualified Dublin Core Elements not sufficient for our collection?
If not, Can Qualifier be Added?

23. Suggestions for Metadata Creation
Be CONSISTENT!
Create Application Profile for Local Metadata Standard
Describe One Resource
Other Description can be Added as URI
Or, Export One Set of Information,
not Both

24. Share the Other Information!
Create Collection Information Page that Include Collection Policy and Application Profile
Include the information in Metadata (Collection Title with URL)
from ‘Shareable Metadata’ and ‘Dublin Core Metadata Harvested through OAI PMH’’

25. Thanks! Questions and Comments Myung-Ja Han (mhan3@illinois.edu)
Christine Cho

26. Bibliography
Digital Library Federation/National Science Digital Library (2005). Best Practices for OAI Data Provider Implementations and Shareable Metadata.
 Jackson, A. S., Han, M. J., Groetsch, K., Mustafoff, M., & Cole, T. W. (2008). Dublin Core Metadata Harvested through OAI-PMH. Journal of Library Metadata, 8 (1), (5-21).
Park, Jung-ran & Sang Joon Park (2005). Digital collection management software employed by libraries and museums: Evaluation of metadata semantic mapping functionality. Presented at the poster session at ALISE (Association/Library and Information Science Education) annual conference, January 11-14, 2005 in Boston, Massachusetts.
Shreeves, Sarah L. (2007). The Dynamics of Sharing: An Introduction to Shareable Metadata and Interoperability. Presentation for Panel on the Dynamics of Sharing: An Introduction to Shareable Metadata and Interoperability. Annual Conference of the Society for American Archivists. Chicago, Il. August 31,
Zeng, Marcia Lei & Jian Qin (2008). Metadata. New York, NY: Neal-Schuman Publishers.