Difference between revisions of "Feb. 10, 2006"

From Metadata-Registry
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 1: Line 1:
== Agenda ==
+
== Agenda and Notes, 2/10/06 ==
1. Discuss current state of GEM metadata feeds (see below)
+
  
2. Discuss MMS integration (per Diane/Jon emails)
+
1. Discussed UIUC/IMLS project.
 +
* The problems with harvesting from UIUC: only Simple DC, no explicit connection between collections and items.
 +
* Diane will mess around with the data we have, and show Stuart and Diny how it looks and what we can do with it, including samples of CUL Metadata Services reports.
 +
* We should come up with questions for the UIUC crowd about what they'd be willing to do to help
 +
 
 +
2. Discuss current state of GEM metadata feeds (see below)
  
 
== GEM Metadata Management Needs ==
 
== GEM Metadata Management Needs ==
Line 20: Line 24:
 
** Only about 3,500 records harvested from resource-embedded metadata (HTML header)
 
** Only about 3,500 records harvested from resource-embedded metadata (HTML header)
 
** Approximately
 
** Approximately
 +
 +
3. Discuss MMS integration (per Diane/Jon emails)

Revision as of 12:29, 10 February 2006

Agenda and Notes, 2/10/06

1. Discussed UIUC/IMLS project.

  • The problems with harvesting from UIUC: only Simple DC, no explicit connection between collections and items.
  • Diane will mess around with the data we have, and show Stuart and Diny how it looks and what we can do with it, including samples of CUL Metadata Services reports.
  • We should come up with questions for the UIUC crowd about what they'd be willing to do to help

2. Discuss current state of GEM metadata feeds (see below)

GEM Metadata Management Needs

  • GEM as hybrid (fairly tight federation of data providers (current consortium) and select open harvest (new)
  • Current feed integration underway of major federation collections using GEM XML 2.0 schema (alternative collection holder or GEMCat4 RDF/XML)
    • Federated data--minimal quality control and minimal initial augmentation
    • Harvested data--potentially high quality issues and initial augmentation
  • Current state of collection
    • Approximately 45,000 consortium member conformant GEM records
    • Approximately 5,000 non-consortium member OAI-harvested records
    • Two GEM schema versions--GEM 1.0 and GEM 2.0
    • Variety of source encodings (OAI (minimal), GEM Syntax 0, GEM DB-XML, GEM XML 2.0, RDF/XML (2.0))
      • Current integration underway (GEM XML 2.0 Schema)
    • Largest proportion (over 50%) of records in top 10 collections--attack first
    • Largest percentage of records (26,000) coming through GEM harvest of separate (non embedded) metadata records
      • While I am not yet certain of this fact, I think GEM actually controls the vast majority of these records (i.e., we harvest from ourself :-))
    • Only about 3,500 records harvested from resource-embedded metadata (HTML header)
    • Approximately

3. Discuss MMS integration (per Diane/Jon emails)