Application Profile Development for Consortial Digital Libraries
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5860/lrts.51n2.116Abstract
In 2002, OhioLINK’s consortia of libraries recognized the need to restructure and standardize the metadata used in the OhioLINK Digital Media Center as a step in the development of a general purpose digital object repository. The authors explore the concept of digital object repositories and mechanisms used to develop complex data structures in a cooperative environment, report the findings and recommendations of the OhioLINK Database Management and Standards Committee (DMSC) Metadata Task Force, and identify lessons learned, addressing data structures as well as data content standards. A significant result of the work was the creation of the OhioLINK Digital Media Center (DMC) Metadata Application Profile and the implementation of a core set of metadata elements and Dublin Core Metadata Element Set mappings for use in OhioLINK digital projects. The profile and core set of metatadata elements are described.
References
() OhioLINK, The Digital Media Center. n () OhioLINK DMSC Metadata Task Force, “OhioLINK Digital Media Center (DMC) Metadata Application Profile” (May 11, 2004). n () OhioLINK, The Digital Resource Commons, nJohn Attig, Ann Copeland, Michael Pelikan, '“Context and Meaning: The Challenges of Metadata for a Digital Image Library within the University,”' College & Research Libraries 65 no. 3 (May 2004): 251nPhilip Hider, '“Australian Digital Collections: Metadata Standards and Interoperability,”' Australian Academic & Research Libraries 35 no. 4 (Dec. 2004): (accessed Aug. 11, 2006)http://alia.org.au/publishing/aarl/35.4/full.text/hider.htmlnThomas R. Bruce, Diane I. Hillmann, Diane I. Hillmann Ed., Elaine L. Westbrooke Ed., '“The Continuum of Metadata Quality: Defining, Expressing, Exploiting,”' Metadata in Practice (Chicago: ALA 2004): 240- 238–56n () Naomi Dushay and Diane I. Hillmann, “Analyzing Metadata for Effective Use and Re-Use,” 1–10. nSheila S. Intner, Susan S. Lazinger, Jean Weihs, Metadata and Its Impact on Libraries (Westport, Conn.: Libraries Unlimited 2006): 189-nAttig, Copeland, and Pelikan, “Context and Meaning,” 258n A Framework of Guidance for Building Good Digital Collections (Bethesda, Md.: National Information Standards Organization 2004) (accessed Aug. 11, 2006)n () Consortium for the Computer Interchange of Museum Information (CIMI), “Guide to Best Practice: Dublin Core.” n () CIMI, “Guide to Best Practice”; Dublin Core Metadata Initiative, “Dublin Core Metadata Element Set, Version 1.1: Reference Description” (Dec. 20, 2004). nIntner, Lazinger, and Weihs,
Metadata and Its Impact on Libraries
, 189nIbidnMurtha Baca, '“Practical Issues in Applying Metadata Schemas and Controlled Vocabularies to Cultural Heritage Information,”' Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 36 no. 3/4 (2003): 54nGrace Agnew, '“Developing a Metadata Strategy,”' Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 36 no. 3/4 (2003): 31nCharly Bauer, Jane A. Carlin, Susan Wyngaard Ed., '“The Case for Collaboration: The OhioLINK Digital Media Center,”' Digital Images and Art Libraries in the Twenty-First Century (Binghamton, N.Y.: Haworth 2003): 86- 69–86nBruce and Hillmann, “The Continuum of Metadata Quality,” 241nLiz Bishoff, Elizabeth S. Meagher, Diane I. Hillmann Ed., Elaine L. Westbrooke Ed., '“Building Heritage Colorado: The Colorado Digitization Experience,”' Metadata in Practice (Chicago: ALA 2004): 35- 17–36nWilly Cromwell-Kessler, Murtha Baca Ed., '“Cross-walks, Metadata Mapping, and Interoperability: What Does it All Mean?”' Introduction to Metadata: Pathways to Digital Information (Los Angeles: Getty Information Institute 1998): 20- 19–22nBishoff and Meagher, “Building Heritage Colorado,” 19–20nHider, “Australian Digital Collections.”nMichael A. Chopey, Richard P. Smiraglia Ed., '“Planning and Implementing a Metadata-Driven Digital Repository,”' Metadata: A Cataloger’s Primer (Binghamton, N.Y.: Haworth 2005): 259- 255–87nIntner, Lazinger, and Weihs,
Metadata and Its Impact on Libraries
, 189nCromwell-Kessler, “Crosswalks, Meta-data Mapping, and Interoperability,” 20nBaca, “Practical Issues.”nBishoff and Meagher, “Building Heritage Colorado.”n () Collaborative Digitization Program home page, nNancy Allen, '“Collaboration Through the Colorado Digitization Project,”' First Monday 5 no. 6 (June 2000): (accessed Dec. 15, 2006)www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue5_6/allen/index.htmlnIbidnIntner, Lazinger, and Weihs,
Metadata and Its Impact on LibrariesnAttig, Copeland, and Pelikan, “Context and Meaning.”nIbid., 256nBaca, “Practical Issues,” 47nStuart R. Weibel, '“Border Crossings: Reflection on a Decade of Metadata Consensus Building,”' D-Lib Magazine 11 no. 7/8 (July/Aug. 2005): (accessed Aug. 11, 2006); Suzie Allard, Thura R. Mack, and Melanie Feltner-Reichert, “The Librarian’s Role in Institutional Repositories: A Content Analysis of the Literature”,
Reference Services Review
, no. 3(2005): 325–36www.dlib.org/dlib/july05/weibel/07weibel.htmlnChopey, “Planning and Implementing”; Weibel, “Border Crossings.”nWeibel, “Border Crossings.”nAttig, Copeland, and Pelikan, “Context and Meaning.”nMurtha Baca, Cataloging Cultural Objects: A Guide to Describing Cultural Works and Their Images (Chicago: ALA 2006)nBishoff and Meagher, “Building Heritage Colorado,” 30nChopey, “Planning and Implementing.”nPriscilla Caplan, Metadata Fundamentals for All Librarians (Chicago: ALA 2003)nDublin Core Metadata Initiative, “Dublin Core Metadata Element Set.”nAgnew, “Developing a Metadata Strategy.”nHider, “Australian Digital Collections.”nBishoff and Meagher, “Building Heritage Colorado.”nCDP Metadata Working Group, “Dublin Core Metadata Best Practices.”nJewel Ward, '“Unqualified Dublin Core Usage in OAI-PMH Data Providers,”' OCLC Systems & Services 20 no. 1 (2004): 40-47nBruce and Hillmann, “The Continuum of Metadata Quality,” 238nCarolyn Guinchard, '“Dublin Core Use in Libraries: A Survey,”' OCLC Systems & Services 18 no. 1 (2002): 0-50nBaca, “Practical Issues,” 48nCromwell-Kessler, “Crosswalks, Meta-data Mapping, and Interoperability.”nIntner, Lazinger, and Weihs,
Metadata and Its Impact on Libraries
, 189nHider, “Australian Digital Collections.”nAgnew, “Developing a Metadata Strategy,” 36, 41n () Dublin Core Metadata Initiative, “DCMI Glossary” (Nov. 7, 2005), nHeike Neuroth, Traugott Koch, Keizo Oyama Ed., Hironobu Gotoda Ed., '“Metadata Mapping and Application Profiles: Approaches to Providing the Cross-searching of Heterogeneous Resources in the EU Project Renardus,”' DC-2001: Proceedings of the International Conference on Dublin Core Metadata Applications (Tokyo, Japan: National Institute of Informatics 2001) 122–29 nRachel Heery, Manjula Patel, '“Application Profiles: Mixing and Matching Metadata Schemas,”' Ariadne 25 (Sept. 2000): (accessed Aug. 17, 2006)www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue25/app-profilesnMakx Dekkers, '“Application Profiles, or How to Mix and Match Metadata Schemas,”' Cultivate Interactive 3 (Jan. 2001): (accessed Aug. 18, 2006)www.cultivate-int.org/issue3/schemasnDublin Core Metadata Initiative, “DCMI Glossary.”nBruce and Hillmann, “The Continuum of Metadata Quality,” 253nIbidnErik Duval, '“Metadata Principles and Practicalities,”' D-Lib Magazine 8 no. 4 (April 2002): (accessed Aug. 17, 2006); Heery and Patel, “Application Profiles.”www.dlib.org/dlib/april02/weibel/04weibel.htmln () Rachel Heery and Robina Clayphan, “Metadata Application Profiles” (tutorial, “DC-2005: International Conference on Dublin Core Metadata Applications,” University Carlos III of Madrid, Spain, Sept. 15, 2005). n () Dublin Core Metadata Initiative, “DC-Library Application Profile (DC-Lib)” (Sept. 10, 2004). n () CDP Metadata Working Group, “Dublin Core Metadata Best Practices”; Athabasca University Experts Team, “Canadian Culture Online (CCO) Policy: Metadata Strategy and Development of a Matrix of Metadata Elements” (Athabasca, Alberta, Canada: Athabasca University, 2004). n () Metadata Implementation Group, “UW Libraries Dublin Core Data Dictionaries” (Seattle, Wash.: University of Washington Libraries). nDuval et al., “Metadata Principles and Practicalities.”nIbidnRaym Crow, '“The Case for Institutional Repositories: A SPARC Position Paper,”' ARL Bimonthly Report 223 (Aug. 2002): (accessed Aug. 17, 2006)www.arl.org/newsltr/223/instrepo.htmlnClifford A. Lynch, '“Institutional Repositories: Essential Infrastructure for Scholarship in the Digital Age,”' Portal 3 no. 2 (Apr. 2003): 328nK. T. Anuradha, '“Design and Development of Institutional Repositories: A Case Study,”' International Information & Library Review 37 no. 3 (Sept. 2005): 169n () Raym Crow, “The Case for Institutional Repositories: A SPARC Position Paper” [full paper] (Washington, D.C.: Association of Research Libraries, 2002). n () Andrew Odlyzko, “The Rapid Evolution of Scholarly Communication” (Ann Arbor, Mich.: PEAK Conference, 2000). nSuzie Allard, Thura R. Mack, Melanie Feltner-Reichert, '“The Librarian’s Role in Institutional Repositories: A Content Analysis of the Literature,”' Reference Services Review 33 no. 3 (2005): 333nGerard van Westrienen, Clifford A. Lynch, '“Academic Institutional Repositories: Deployment Status in 13 Nations as of Mid 2005,”' D-Lib Magazine 11 no. 9 (Sept. 2005): (accessed Aug. 17, 2006)www.dlib.org/dlib/september05/westrienen/09westrienen.htmlnM. Kathleen Shearer, '“Institutional Repositories: Towards the Identification of Critical Success Factors”' Canadian Journal of Information and Library Science 27 no. 3 (2002/2003): 89-108nChopey, “Planning and Implementing.”nLynch, “Institutional Repositories.”n () Dublin Core Metadata Initiative, “Dublin Core Metadata Element Set”; Visual Resources Association, Data Standards Committee, “VRA Core Categories,” Version 3.0 (Feb. 20, 2002). n () OhioLINK DMSC Metadata Task Force, “The DMC Core Fields Analysis Document” (Columbus, Ohio: OhioLINK, 2006). n () OhioLINK, “OhioLINK DMC Proposal Form.” n () Library of Congress, Encoded Archival Description, n () Text Encoding Initiative Consortium, n () Advanced Distributed Learning, “SCORM” (2004), nVisual Resources Association, Data Standards Committee, “VRA Core Categories.”n () Open Archives Initiative, “The Open Archives Initiative Protocol for Metadata Harvesting: Protocal Version 2.0 of 2002-06-14” (Oct. 12, 2004). nCarl Lagoze, '“Keeping Dublin Core Simple: Cross-Domain or Resource Description?”' D-Lib Magazine 7 no. 1 (Jan. 2001): (accessed Aug. 18, 2006)www.dlib.org/dlib/january01/lagoze/01lagoze.htmln Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules (Ottawa: Canadian Library Assn. 2002) rev. London: Library Assn. Publishing; Chicago: ALA, 2002); Steven L. Hensen,
Archives, Personal Papers, and Manuscripts: A Cataloging Manual for Archival Repositories, Historical Societies, and Manuscript Libraries
. 2nd ed. (Chicago: Society of American Archivists, 1989); OhioLINK DMSC Metadata Task Force, “OhioLINK Metadata Application Profile.”n () Library of Congress, Library of Congress Authorities. n () World Wide Web Consortium, Date and Time Formats (ISO 8601) (Sept. 15, 1997). n Library of Congress Subject Headings (Washington, D.C.: Library of Congress Cataloging Distribution Service 2006) National Library of Medicine, Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) (July 14, 2006). n () J. Paul Getty Trust, Getty Thesaurus of Geographic Names Online (2000). n () Library of Congress, ISO 639–2: Codes for the Representation of Names of Languages (June 7, 2006). n () J. Paul Getty Trust, Art & Architecture Thesaurus Online (2000). n'“The Ohio Digital Resource Commons,”' OhioLINK Update 12 no. 1 (April 2006): 1 (accessed Aug. 18, 2006)www.ohiolink.edu/about/update/apr2006.pdfnIbid., 2n
Published
Issue
Section
License
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC-BY-NC 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) after it has been accepted for publication. Sharing can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
