[pd-discuss] Open Metadata Handbook

Thu Dec 15 11:12:39 UTC 2011

[Just re-sending the original mail...]

Hi Jonathan,

Thanks for the explanations. When I read your emails and the draft, my first reaction (a bit caricatured) was "why are they embarked on this?!?". I find in your mail some elements that are crucial for the understanding of all this, which are quite missing in the current draft--or not emphasized enough.

In particular, I find it really important to focus on the requirements of scenarios like public domain calculation.

Of course you may argue that if you want to promote metadata openly, which is a goal of OKFN, then it's better if it's interoperable. Both at technical and higher levels (ie., machine but also people get a chance to understand it).
The problem is that without a specific scenario, it seems a bit of ill attempt. Chances are high, that would you would end up just re-inventing Dublin Core or other things. (if you start from the bibliographic domain, which is again something I'd highly recommend).

Now, if you have a need, which is no longer only "we want open metadata" but "we want metadata that serves open access to documents", that sounds a better starting point. OKFN, as the business owner of that scenario, becomes entitled to make recommendations. And it is then entitled to write some stuff about how to match these recommendations with the data as expressed according to the many standards around.

I don't have the feeling that the current draft is written that way. For example:
"The goal is to produce something that can be given to various GLAM [...] to help them set up a proper metadata model for their works."
"The purpose of this section is to help GLAM institutions decide what is the best standard to use for the description of their works."

All this reads like you want to teach granny to suck eggs. And that won't help your document be appreciated in a domain which is already quite suffering from over-documentation and many standards.

Cheers,

Antoine

> Dear Antoine,
>
> Thank you so much for all of your feedback, which is really valuable.
> We'd really like to collaborate with you on this if possible.
>
> To briefly explain where the current Open Metadata Handbook is coming from:
>
>    * We have been working on a set of algorithms to assist people in
> finding out whether a given work is in the public domain in their
> jurisdiction [1]. We've been working on this for several years.
> Europeana Connect has also done work in this area.
>    * In order to do public domain calculation you can either do (i)
> manual calculation (where people input relevant data to determine
> status) or (ii) (semi-)automated calculation (where structured data
> from a variety of sources may be used to provide data to determine
> status). We are interested in collecting more data from more sources
> to help with (ii). This is where we are coming from on this project.
>    * The OKF has quite a bit of data (e.g. from BBC, from British
> Library), and hope that when Europeana data is released under CC0
> (next June?) then we will be able to use this as well.
>    * The Open Metadata Handbook is intended to be a *very* preliminary
> go at mapping metadata structures that are used by different
> institutions, organisations and projects. We want to have a rough and
> ready document that helps people navigate the huge amount of work that
> has done in this area - and builds on this rather than attempting to
> duplicate it. In the medium term this is intended to be driven by
> practitioners in the GLAM sector who are more knowledgeable than we
> are about different standards and different technologies.
>    * I fully agree with you that: (i) there is hubris in trying to do a
> 'universal metadata guide' that is all things to all people, (ii) we
> would do well to make a guide which is accessible for and useful to
> non-technical users, as well as non-specialists who are interested in
> consuming open data, perhaps from a variety of different sources, who
> know nothing about metadata standards.
>
> Hence I suggest that we:
>
>    * Add a note about who this intended for in a preface to the book
>    * Go through each section with a view to making it easier for
> non-technical people and non-experts to understand
>
> We just had a very successful workshop on legal aspects of open data
> in London last month [2], and we're planning a follow up event for
> early next year, perhaps at the V&A. Would you be interested in
> participating in something about metadata standards?
>
> All the best,
>
> Jonathan
>
> [1] http://publicdomain.okfn.org/calculators/
> [2] http://blog.okfn.org/2011/11/01/open-data-in-cultural-heritage-finding-your-way-through-the-license-labyrinth-london-24th-november-2011/