Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 15 Next »

Workplan

2021-2022 Metadata Sub-team Work Plan

Accomplishments

  • Completed an update to the MARC importer with significant improvements:

    • Mapped MARC elements to DACS elements and prioritized DACS mappings

    • Documented missing behaviors and created tickets for same

      ANW-1568 - Getting issue details... STATUS (ERR)

      ANW-1567 - Getting issue details... STATUS (ERR)

      ANW-1565 - Getting issue details... STATUS (ERR)

      ANW-1260 - Getting issue details... STATUS (KS)

      ANW-1566 - Getting issue details... STATUS (ERR)

      ANW-1557 - Getting issue details... STATUS (KS)

    • ANW-1411 - Getting issue details... STATUS (VA)

    • ANW-1410 - Getting issue details... STATUS (VA)

    • ANW-1409 - Getting issue details... STATUS (VA)

    • ANW-1408 - Getting issue details... STATUS (VA)

    • Identified behaviors that can be removed and simplified

  • Completed re-working and actual data modeling for the EAD2002 importer with thanks to Regine

  • Addressed default behavior for MARC 300 fields ANW-1260 - Getting issue details... STATUS

  • Identified desired behavior for logging ANW-1558 - Getting issue details... STATUS

  • Commented on tickets as appropriate [list of tickets]

  • Presented at the 2022 Online Forum and solicited community feedback

    • Include stats that I generated after the Forum

  • Piloted working meetings to help members get work done - it was acknowledged as a good idea but it didn’t work for everyone

  • Improved reactive strategies for tracking changes

    • Tested and implemented https://app.github-file-watcher.com/ to be automatically notified of changes made to the import/exporter code

    • Tested and implemented a subscription to a Jira filter for the Metadata tag

  • Tiers of Support - Attempt at more transparent process for how we do what we do

  • Task Force idea - Want to suggest an ad hoc taskforce to update the ASpace data model

Priorities for next term

  • Continue work on the EAD importer in earnest. Plan work to accommodate those who may be able to read Ruby and those who cannot.

  • Revisit Tiers of Support as a principles document instead of a statement on scope

  • Spec for dropping MARC import support (if not completed by this term)

    • Pull all the non-core fields (2xx, 3xx, 754, 856) except the 5xx’s; for the 5xx’s, everything that is a core field gets mapped, but everything that is a 5xx just gets a mapping to a local note, like a 590. We know this a relatively big change, maybe put this in the roadmap, so that it doesn’t happen quietly. Elizabeth volunteers to write that spec, including the justification. You’ll get a list of what was imported.

  •  Spec for ANW-547 - Getting issue details... STATUS , folder for spec documents here: https://drive.google.com/drive/u/1/folders/1G4ACVJ9r3FUfStsnyZkDJWbyU-bErZzl

  • Bring up the retiring of MARC behaviors at the next joint UAC/TAC meeting, which will be in the fall. Elizabeth Roke nominated to handle that communication

  • If we get Kevin’s ticket, ANW-1558 - Getting issue details... STATUS we should do an email announcement to the listserv and Google Group

  • Pilot a Rotating group of ex officio’s from Metadata who sit in on Dev Pri meetings

    • This excellent idea came from the acknowledgement that there’s only so much we can ask of our fellows to alert us to changes, and sometimes they may simply not be aware that these changes will impact TAC-MD

    • The idea was raised that we begin a rotating roaster of Metadata reps who sit in on Dev Pri meetings to listen and know when a ticket should be tagged for us to review. This is a strategy to get us involved further upstream.

    • Elizabeth volunteers, Kevin volunteers

    • Not sure whether it rotates through the year or by the year, i.e. do different folks sit in on different meetings throughout the year or is one member rep determined per term?

  • RiC review

    • Essentially we know we absolutely must render a verdict on this, but we decline to do so on a draft. We have doubts about the stated aspirations (transmission standard, descriptive standard, one ring to rule them all). We want to be included in the decision of how ASpace reacts, and not just the recipients of said decision.

Retrospective in Brief

Start doing (green star)

Stop doing 🛑

Keep doing (blue star)

  • Increase community engagement

    • Reports out to the community via the listserv (i.e. we’ve done this, what do you think?)

    • Engage ticket writers and commenters (invite to meetings, ask to work on specs)

  • Have Program Manger and/or Community Engagement Coordinator attend quarterly for questions

  • Ex Officio idea (see above)

  • Working meetings was acknowledged as a good idea but it didn’t work for everyone, so this isn’t so much a “stop doing” as a “continue if needed/wanted”

  • Presenting at the Online Forum

  • Develop a workflow for maintaining the importer/exporters sustainably. Suggestion to add metadata standards tags to tickets that require touching those files in the codebase. It is currently a major problem that Metadata Standards team members need to be able to partially read Ruby code to be a part of this group.

    • Put in document formerly know as Tiers of Support

  • Reminder of Action Items in email form

  • Explicit and helpful links in agenda and emails

  • GitHub File Watcher

  • Dedicated reading time in the meetings

Recommendations for finishing up this term

  1. Being included upstream - Valerie has drafted an email to be sent to the entire council at either the end of this term and/or the beginning of next term, plus I explicitly mentioned it at the final TAC meeting this term.

  • Some of this feeling was generated after all the changes that came with 3.0, but we’ve moved forward on that concern forgetting that we were invited to participate and declined. So this is about aligning both our own expectations about our work and being included further upstream in changes.

  • This is a good example of where things that the metadata group should weigh in on are buried in specification documents and tickets.  Note that the specification includes a request to amend the EAD and EAD3 exports

  • Communicate it to Christine, the developers, but also TAC and Dev Pri.

  • More about a heads up than an approval process; fundamental to needing to track changes to documentation. Even if it becomes the primary job of this group to actively document and track those changes. We need to be tagged any time anything touches an importer/exporter

Leadership for next term

Lead: Regine Heberlein

Vice Lead: To be identified from new members next term

Outgoing Lead: Valerie Addonizio

  • No labels