2019-12-12 Meeting Notes

Date and Time

Thursday 12/12/19, 3pm Eastern

Zoom URL

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

Participants

• @Kevin Schlottmann

• @James Griffin (Unlicensed) (Note taker)

• @Bria Lynn Parker (Unlicensed) - regrets

• @Jared Campbell - regrets

• @Christine Di Bella

• @Daniel Michelson

• @Dallas Pillen

• @Wiedeman, Gregory

Goals

• Work Plan

Discussion topics

December Discussion Topic

[Draft, kws 2019-12-09]

Metadata Standards is a new sub-team. We like to use this time to request feedback or comment from other members of the TAC.
First, a brief report out a couple of organizing thoughts and initial activities, follow by a couple of open-ended questions.

*Tiers of metadata standards, and what we chose to put into Tier 1 (MARC and EAD2002)
*Brief work plan summary
*Will be reviewing published import/export standards
*We have sample records in GitHub, including an ever-growing MARC record with content named for fields
*Attempt to review JIRA tickets with the metadata tag

Q: Does TAC have other needs or expectations for this sub-team?

Q: How we can use our repository or our sample record to provide other services which are useful for the community?

Q: EGAD Conceptual Model and Ontology were released (https://www.ica.org/en/egad-ric-conceptual-model) Should we be looking to address this in the near future?

Possible Q: How are others looking to use linked data for archival description? Is anyone looking to load triple/graph RDF store with this data?

Action items

Notes

Introductions

Review Open Metadata Tickets

• (No new issues, 320 needs to be reviewed by this Sub-Team, but it is not urgent)

• Were we going to switch to another JIRA tag, and this has been discussed with Dev. Pri.

• Once the new tag is up, the starting minutes will be updated

GitHub Repositories

• API Documentation

• Can use the admin/admin login, and James needs to provide documentation still

• Otherwise, Greg and Jared offered EAD examples

• Kevin has been pushing commits to the master branch on the MARC example repository

December TAC Meeting

• (Reviewing the proposed discussion points above)

• This is mostly going to consist of an update of our progress as an introduction

• Then, open-ended questions are going to be offered to the entire group of attendees

• Additional Questions:

• EGAD Conceptual Model and Ontology were released (https://www.ica.org/en/egad-ric-conceptual-model)

• Should we be looking to address this sooner?

• Possible question (but maybe tangential): How are others looking to use linked data for archival description?

• There is going to be a move towards BIBFRAME at some point in the future, it does make sense for ArchivesSpace to be thinking of points of integration

DACS Tooltips Review

• Daniel provided a spreadsheet

• Are the existing references in the Yaml file correct? Are they helpful?

• Sometimes they just reference DACS 4.8 standards, without a more clear explanation

• There are also cases where tooltips aren’t aligned with DACS, is there a standard which we should be referring to in its place? (e. g. list of language codes)

• Did not conclusively identify every possible source for a controlled vocabulary, but did offer a number of suggestions

• Should we add a few more columns for addressing DACS references and other references?

• That would be helpful for those who are less familiar with DACS to proceed with contributing to the spreadsheet

• “Flag for Discussion” or “Further Notes” columns might be helpful

• Once the columns are added, these can be added to the minutes in order to showcase this deliverable

MARC-XML Import Review

• Open to reformatting this, also to replacing this as a standalone spreadsheet

• This is currently what ArchivesSpace is publicly stating is the mapping for the MARC-XML element mappings

• For many of the elements, context is needed in order to grasp what precisely is supported in ArchivesSpace

• Kevin has been working with the ArchivesSpace sandbox installation in order to check that these cases are indeed supported

• Problems with bulk dates: dates were not built up from <marc:subfield code="g"> bulk dates

• It would be ideal if one could link to the records which are imported into the ArchivesSpace sandbox installation

• We can explore deploying a test server for this sub-team

• This would include a demo. database which would ensure that the data is persisted between sessions

• Otherwise, the sandbox has its records purged on a weekly basis

• We would want to be on the released code rather than an unstable release or edge

  • Christine will explore requesting an installation for testing purposes

• 245$ and 245$g import problems: Do we wish to discuss this, or offer a ticket?

• Best to ensure that tickets are reviewed by Dev. Pri. more immediately

• Dev. Pri. prioritizes tickets based upon what is possible in terms of labor resources (e. g. developer time for feature requests)

• Clustering is helpful from the standpoint of process, so multiple MARC records for a sprint

• It’s always really helpful for testing with examples, providing specific examples (such as fixtures for writing the tests)

• Providing a link to a specific MARC record might be helpful

• Participation and contributions to the testing is most welcome

• By the next meeting, Kevin hopes to write a ticket containing the test data for the developers

• There were also problems with the 520 field

• There are going to be questions which cut across MARC fields

• Might we track these questions using the Wiki? All agreed

• When checking these MARC fields, check column H to check the testing process

• If this process looks okay, should we use this for the EAD process?

• Perhaps working on this concurrently, that might be more efficient (given that there are some who are not directly involved in MARC)

Further Topics

None were specified

Next Scheduled Meeting

This will be held in early January

Meeting adjourned at 15:48