innovation in metadata design, implementation & best practices

DCMI Libraries Working Group Meeting Report, Seattle, USA, 29 September 2003

This is a summarised version of the report from the Seattle meeting. The full report can be found at http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind0311&L=dc-ibraries&T=0&F=&S=&P=153

DC-Lib and Usage Board Decisions

Rebecca Guenther summarised the change history of DC-Lib to date and reported on Usage Board decisions from June and September 2003 that will have an impact on the next version.

  • Any encoding scheme that has a URI defined in a non-DCMI namespace may be used: DCMI will not define these.
  • Date encoding scheme: ISO8601 (without hyphens: 20031022) approved by DCMI and will be added to the terms.
  • Type encoding schemes: use URIs established by LC for AAT (Art and Architecture Thesaurus) and GMGPC (Thesaurus for Graphic Materials II: genre and physical characteristics)—respectively these are:
  • Identifier encoding schemes:
    • DOI and SICI approved contingent on action taken on IETF RFC for "info" URI scheme. If "info" URI approved they will be encoded using an "info" URI and further identifier schemes will not need DCMI approval. Otherwise DOI and SICI will be identified in the DCMI namespace.
    • ISBN and ISSN have been registered with IETF as URN namespaces.
      e.g. urn:isbn:0123879866
  • Coverage encoding schemes: use LC URI for MARC Geographic Area Codes and MARC Country Codes
    e.g. http://www.loc.gov/marc.gac
  • Some issues on namespace vs. encoding scheme need to be worked out.
  • Agent issues:
    • Roles: Use term from MARC relators as refinement of Contributor. LC will make the terms/codes list available marked up in RDF. UB will issue a recommendation on this.
      e.g. http://www.loc.gov/marc.relators/actor
    • Structured values (e.g. Agent Detail) ruled out—should be in a description of another resource according to the Abstract Model.

Open Issues in DC-Lib

The meeting discussed open issues in the current version of DC-Lib
http://dublincore.org/documents/2002/09/24/library-application-profile/

  • Date - a need had been identified for an encoding scheme or profile of ISO 8601 to cover B.C.E. dates, questionable and approximate dates. As there are similar needs in other working groups it was decided to propose reconvening the Date working group to the Advisory Board. Eric Childress was proposed as Chair. (Note: this proposal was agreed.)
  • Type - in addition to those mentioned above, the working group may propose encoding schemes to the list for inclusion as the need arises. If appropriate they can be added with an LC URI. Ann Apps (Chair of the Type WG) will send the list produced by that group.
  • Identifier and Location have contradictory comments. The comment in identifier should be deleted.
  • Source - it was uncertain if a DOI could be assigned to a non-digital resource, which is how DC-Lib uses this element. According to the IDF FAQ it is possible to do this but the circumstances in which you may want to are not obvious. There is no reason therefore to remove it from the AP.
  • Language - Remove the "Open question" and put the comment in the appropriate box.
  • Relation - future work still includes possibly identifying a need for HasVersion. A note should be added note about reciprocal "IsVersionOf" elements.
  • Rights - need to determine how to use this in libraries; there is ongoing discussion in rights metadata in various applications. This should be left unchanged for now but consider Stu's Creative Commons proposal.
  • Audience - evaluate whether any refinements or encoding schemes are appropriate for DC-Lib use. MARC target codes may be considered. No change was proposed. Encoding scheme issue.
  • Location - open questions about using library codes and possible use of a URI to an entry in an authority file. Questions not resolved. Clarification needed about whether a URI can be used in any element. At a minimum give human readable information.

CEN Guidelines for Application Profiles

There was a presentation of the CEN DC Application Profile Guidelines. This document has been produced to provide a standard way for expressing DC application profiles. It can be downloaded from http://www.cenorm.be/isss/cwa14855/. It is proposed to reformat DC-Lib using this format.

Charter and Workplan

The remainder of the discussion concerned the revision of the Charter and the status of the milestones for the working group—the latter making up the work plan for the following year.

The Charter was originally drawn up in 1999 and revision was desired largely to reflect the fact that DC has become widely recognised and used by libraries since then. The results of these discussion are reflected in the revised charter on the web page. Volunteers or suggested names are welcomed to fulfil the final point regarding other bibliographic bodies.

The workplan comprises four items in addition to those on-going items:

  1. Revise DC-Lib in line with Usage Board and Working Group decisions and reformat according to CEN DCAP Guidelines. Submit DC-Lib to the Usage board for "registered" status. Who: Robina Clayphan When: March 2004.
  2. Add encoding schemes to DC-Lib. This is an on-going task with encoding schemes being proposed as the need arises. Rebecca Guenther to provide LC URI if appropriate or "fast track" proposal to UB. Who: all WG members to propose When: on-going.
  3. Produce a guidance document for implementers of DC-Lib. It should include examples and be produced as a separate document from DC-Lib for ease of translation. Who: Rebecca will pass the names of existing volunteers to Robina. When: after production of the XML schema.
  4. Write an XML schema for DC-Lib. Who: Robin Wendler has volunteered. When: after the next revision of DC-Lib.

Respectfully submitted,
Robina Clayphan
Chair, DCMI Libraries Working Group