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 25 Next »

Date and Time

09:00PDT/12:00 EDT - 10:00PDT/13:00 EDT

Zoom URL

https://lyrasis.zoom.us/j/897871318

Participants

Goals

Discussion topics

Item

Introductions (Ice Breaker Question: Do you have a pet, and if so, what kind?)

Metadata standards (for descriptive and for encoding use cases) which should be supported as default ArchivesSpace solutions

Status of the Describing Archives, a Content Standard (DACS), and its support within ArchiveSpace

Maintaining published import and export crosswalks for metadata in ArchivesSpace

Documenting ArchivesSpace data mappings (for example, from MARC to EAD)

Scheduling Future Meetings

Action items

  •  

Notes

(Introductions were held)

Overview of the Sub-team

  • We are tasked to come up with a work plan and activities which can be reasonably executed over the next year

  • We should hone in by the end on a rough work plan and begin scheduling

  • Moving ArchivesSpace to support the identified metadata standards

Reviewing the Sub-team Charge

  • 2019-2020 Metadata Standards sub-team

  • Note that we might need to prioritize different parts of the charge

    • We also might not get to every item of the charge

    • This charge can be edited throughout the year

  • Around ArchivesSpace, addressing metadata standards was seen as a real need

  • This charge seems to ensure that this need is going to be addressed

Metadata Standards

  • Migration is often heavily informed by ensuring that the imported metadata follows standardized schema

    • How can we make explicit what ArchivesSpace commits to in terms of metadata standards?

    • How do we document this?

  • Daniel: A lot of this works came out of the structure of the EAD

    • There is a desire to ensure that EAC-CPF and MARC exports are fully supported from within ASpace

    • Tooltips for the system are based on DACS, but this is customizable

    • Resource record section is based on EAD and DACS

  • Internationalization

    • We should note that RAD or ISAD might be preferred by adopters outside of the United States

    • Hence, DACS might not be preferred for those outside of the US

  • OAI-PMH Implementation

    • Note that this supports Dublin Core

  • There are tiers of support for standards when it comes to adherence

    • For some standards, ASpace just exports data with the bare minimum level of compliance

    • This should be distinguished

    • Highest level of compliance and documentation should be there for MARC, but for cases such as Dublin Core, we might just offer the mapping

    • Daniel: EAD adherence is really the highest tier

    • Greg: Defining these tiers and standards can be a work plan item

    • Kevin: MARC is constantly considered at Columbia University, a robust MARC implementation within ASpace would be ideal

    • Greg: We should explore how DACS applies to ASpace, documenting how it is implemented would be valuable

  • Kevin: We should look towards documenting existing import and export mappings for at least EAD and MARC, and get these up to date

    • These are behind by more than one year

    • Bria: In the Migrations Sub-group, having a path for getting these mappings updated would have been valuable

    • Greg: Ensuring that communicating that a certain element must be updated in the mapping alone would be a great contribution

    • Kevin: This would likely be offered as instructions to community members in how to create JIRA tickets for review

  • Christine: Much of the ASpace documentation is being migrated to Confluence, hence it might be best to explore migrating this mapping documentation here as well

    • Kevin: To what extent could some of this process involve documentation generated from the code base?

    • Christine: This is difficult to determine, but when changes are made to the API, there can be documentation updates which are generated

    • Not certain as to whether or not this could be supported for export/import functionality

Data mapping is not a part of the technical documentation

There are a few spreadsheets which are linked from the general documentation

Christine: The technical documentation focuses upon what is involved in installing and deploying the application

There has not been a full effort to update the MARC export/import maps due to limited developer resources

Migrations Working Group found that there are some long-standing, complex issues regarding the importation of more obscure MARC fields

It would be best to try and break this down into actionable tasks

Kevin: Some of the behavior might be adjusted within the JRuby code base

Adjusting the field-level mappings for MARC export/imports can perhaps be demonstrated or documented for the community

Christine: This group should decide what the way is regarding the default/”one true way” to support default mappings

There should also be an understanding that the standards are vast, and that there might be a need to call on expertise from outside of the community

Controlled vocabularies might be an area where catalogers would be preferred in terms of inviting colleagues to collaborate

EAD3 is still also a fairly new standard, and expertise might need to be invited

RIC

https://www.ica.org/en/records-in-contexts-ric-a-standard-for-archival-description-presentation-congress-2016

Exploring how difficult it might be to support Records in Context would be desirable as well

TS-DAC membership ensures that we have parties who are engaged in the development and finalization of this standard

Perhaps we should make a call to the general Technical Advisory Committee

Work Plan Tasks and Goals

  • Defining our level of commitment to various standards

  • Addressing various mappings (this will need to be broken down into tasks, and we will need to ensure that we clearly define our level of commitment)

  • How DACS integration is supported and how tooltips are in sync.

  • Addressing dev. tickets and to what extent a request to improve a feature will be rewarding to the community

  • Offer a mechanism to provide feedback

Next Steps

Offer an e-mail on the Wiki where we define the work plan items

Break them down on to tasks

In four weeks, assign the specific tasks, and define a timeline for each of these

Next TAC call is scheduled for two weeks

We require a work plan, and a draft (which is later adjusted) is acceptable

Doodle will be sent to schedule another call for defining the task list for the Work Plan

Work Plan should have a section as a holding place/wishlist for tasks which might not be prioritized for this term

EAC-CPF is an example of this (although, after some discussion, it was determined that this might be a higher priority)

Meeting adjourned at 12:47 EDT

  • No labels