Thursday 12/12/19, 3pm Eastern
https://lyrasis.zoom.us/j/897871318
List meeting participants using their @mention names:
James Griffin (Unlicensed) (Note taker)
Bria Lynn Parker (Unlicensed) - regrets
Jared Campbell - regrets
@mention a person to add them as an attendee and they will be notified.
List goals for this meeting (e.g., Set design priorities for FY19):
Time | Item | Presenter | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
5 min | Ice Breaker Question: Favorite new years tradition or event? | ||
10 min | Standing item: review metadata tickets | ||
5 min | Deliverables from previous meeting | James will provide updates on the GitHub repositories | |
10 min | Discussion topic for December TAC meeting | Review the draft paragraph and notes below for the December TAC meeting discussion | |
10 min | DACS tooltips review - updates on scope and process | Two groups of tooltips to review. Are the references to DACS in the tooltips that have them clear and accurate? Are there tooltips that should refer to DACS that currently do not? Text of all tooltips is in the common/locales/en.yml file. | |
10 min | MARCXML import review | Review 245 and 520 in Google Sheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1jU6MYF7UI7a-UKdd5XhYCV6W1UyrMMCzYDFlgb8iNW8/edit#gid=1527709562 Review Kevin’s process so far; if looks OK, document on wiki; volunteers to work on it. Q: How to track larger questions, or Qs that cut across fields? | |
5 min | Anything else? |
[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?
Add action items to close the loop on open questions or discussion topics:
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