The priorities below are based on the October 2011 community survey on improving metadata support. DCAT has interpreted the community priorities based on the survey results and have fleshed out those priorities with detailed descriptions, specifics and examples. Anyone should feel free to add their feedback as we will eventually evolve this page into a project plans.
Improved (or more transparent) flexibility:
- simplify/make more accessible (create a UI) for: (and/or may mean creating more educational/tutorials on how/where to do things)
- import/export to metadata other than DC (like in Eprints where you pick a format for export)
- local customization
- how to plug in metadata schemas
- expose RDF triples
- as discussed in the survey, lock down DC (allow adds, but not changes), isolate where customizations are done
- simplify where/how things are done - bring more functionality to the UI or the metadata registry
Hierarchal metadata:
- move away from flat DC which doesn't have relational aspects and towards relational aspect functionality - like MODS
- allow relationships between community/collection/bitstream metadata
- possible iterative solution - create functionality that emulates hierarchal behavior
- example: adding in author affiliation
- example: metadata on bitstream - related back to items
Add metadata authority controls/vocabularies
- education/tutorials on current add-on
- open up rights to use a controlled vocal and link from an external source so it doesn't have to be brought into DSpace - update problem
- example: Nat'l Agricultural Library - linked open data, LC, subject based, NLM
-flexibility - local fields an model metadata they way they need it
-MODS is big, don't know we need to add a schema
-allowing hierarchal metadata, not just MODS, but function
-citation metadata - need something, not sure what would be best
-
DC, MODS, PREMIS, OpenURL ContextObject, ETD-MS, RIS
support for export to any important, support for import less important-but still important
DC, MODS, PREMIS
enhanced metadata for Communities, Collections and/or individual Files (bitstreams) -62%
add metadata authority controls/vocabularies to the data model - 72%
update the Qualified Dublin Core registry in DSpace to the latest standards of the DCMI - 56%
would you have objections to prohibiting changes and deletions that would break compliance with the standardized default Dublin Core metadata schema in DSpace 54% not object
move metadata related configurations from dspace.cfg to the database 34% (may not have understood question)
- fully support hierarchical metadata schemas.
metadata hierarchy and RDF-style relations.
Support some kind of hierarchical metadata format (i.e. MODS) or at least Oct 5, 2011 11:38 AM composed metatada fields (fields with only 1 level of subfields, i.e.
author=name filiation degree) in order to emulate hierarchical behavior.
