The Usage of Simple Dublin Core Metadata in Digital Math and Science Repositories

Windnagel, Ann

doi:10.1080/19386389.2014.909677

Cited by 8 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Following Park (2009), the authors operationalized metadata quality in the service of interoperability as "completeness, accuracy, consistency, and usage of controlled vocabularies." (Other studies, such as Windnagel, 2014, In assessing the effects of poor metadata quality in their data sample, Weagley et al considered how data that was insufficiently interoperable might affect resource discovery. For example, one important source of inconsistency in their sample involved differences in how Dublin Core metadata elements were used.…”

Section: Methodological Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

What does it mean to adopt a metadata standard? A case study of Omeka and the Dublin Core

Maron

Feinberg

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to employ a case study of the Omeka content management system to demonstrate how the adoption and implementation of a metadata standard (in this case, Dublin Core) can result in contrasting rhetorical arguments regarding metadata utility, quality, and reliability. In the Omeka example, the author illustrate a conceptual disconnect in how two metadata stakeholders – standards creators and standards users – operationalize metadata quality. For standards creators such as the Dublin Core community, metadata quality involves implementing a standard properly, according to established usage principles; in contrast, for standards users like Omeka, metadata quality involves mere adoption of the standard, with little consideration of proper usage and accompanying principles. Design/methodology/approach The paper uses an approach based on rhetorical criticism. The paper aims to establish whether Omeka’s given ends (the position that Omeka claims to take regarding Dublin Core) align with Omeka’s guiding ends (Omeka’s actual argument regarding Dublin Core). To make this assessment, the paper examines both textual evidence (what Omeka says) and material-discursive evidence (what Omeka does). Findings The evidence shows that, while Omeka appears to argue that adopting the Dublin Core is an integral part of Omeka’s mission, the platform’s lack of support for Dublin Core implementation makes an opposing argument. Ultimately, Omeka argues that the appearance of adopting a standard is more important than its careful implementation. Originality/value This study contributes to our understanding of how metadata standards are understood and used in practice. The misalignment between Omeka’s position and the goals of the Dublin Core community suggests that Omeka, and some portion of its users, do not value metadata interoperability and aggregation in the same way that the Dublin Core community does. This indicates that, although certain values regarding standards adoption may be pervasive in the metadata community, these values are not equally shared amongst all stakeholders in a digital library ecosystem. The way that standards creators (Dublin Core) understand what it means to “adopt a standard” is different from the way that standards users (Omeka) understand what it means to “adopt a standard.”

show abstract

Section: Methodological Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

What does it mean to adopt a metadata standard? A case study of Omeka and the Dublin Core

Maron

Feinberg

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Though both of these topics have been explored independently, the latter largely outside of library literature, the study represents a unique illumination of library metadata through the lens of general searching. A few studies have examined the frequency of Dublin Core elements on websites (Phelps, 2012;Windnagel, 2014), though this study is unique in its consideration of these elements through external search engines. Though projects like linked open data and current metadata schema development deeply consider the impact of digital searching, the results of this study could potentially lead to search-oriented workflow optimization in existing collections.…”

Section: Commentarymentioning

confidence: 99%

Title, Description, and Subject are the Most Important Metadata Fields for Keyword Discoverability

Costello

2016

EBLIP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

the terms of the Creative CommonsAttribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike License 4.0 International (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-ncsa/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly attributed, not used for commercial purposes, and, if transformed, the resulting work is redistributed under the same or similar license to this one. AbstractObjective -To determine which metadata elements best facilitate discovery of digital collections.Design -Case study.

show abstract

“…Likewise, the semantic vagaries of many DC elements has allowed for a wide spectrum of interpretation, making documentation of how certain elements should be used in a particular context all the more crucial for a responsible evaluation. 49 Knowing that a record has a high level of quality given its original context and guidelines is a very different matter than saying that it currently has a low information quality level. Original contexts may not even be collections, but a digital exhibition with its own set of functional needs that informed the creation of the records.…”

Section: Unity and Boundarymentioning

confidence: 99%

Semiotic Principles for Metadata Auditing and Evaluation

Radio

2016

Cataloging & Classification Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Usage of Simple Dublin Core Metadata in Digital Math and Science Repositories

Cited by 8 publications

References 4 publications

What does it mean to adopt a metadata standard? A case study of Omeka and the Dublin Core

What does it mean to adopt a metadata standard? A case study of Omeka and the Dublin Core

Title, Description, and Subject are the Most Important Metadata Fields for Keyword Discoverability

Semiotic Principles for Metadata Auditing and Evaluation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About