2019-10-17 Meeting Notes

Owned by James Griffin (Unlicensed)
Last updated: Oct 17, 2019
3 min read

 

Date and Time

Oct 17, 2019

01:00PDT/04:00 EDT - 02:00PDT/05:00 EDT

 

Zoom URL

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

 

Participants

  • @Kevin Schlottmann

  • @James Griffin (Unlicensed) (Note taker)

  • @Maggie Hughes

  • @Dallas Pillen

  • @Wiedeman, Gregory

  • @Christine Di Bella

  • @Jared Campbell

  • @Daniel Michelson

 

Goals

 

Discussion topics

Item

Item

Introductions (Ice Breaker Question: What was your first car? If you've never had a car, your first bike?)

Reviewing the Work Plan

Scheduling Future Meetings

 

Action items

 

Notes

Monthly TAC Meeting

  • Updated the TAC team on the outline of the work plan earlier in the week

 

December TAC Call

  • This subteam is scheduled to report on our activity for the December TAC Call

 

Work Plan

  • Need to break these down into smaller tasks, and have people volunteer to take on this work

 

Defining levels of commitment to various standards

  • Key is to determine what this actually mean

  • ASpace exports MARC records

  • But a functional MARC record can still be fairly skeletal in content

  • EAD2002, DACS, and MARC are the core standards, and we should undoubtedly support these

 

Supporting Emerging standards

  • What do we think the second and third tiers look like?

  • EAC-CPF with agents and revision improvements will increase the support to ensure that more than minimal records can be exported

  • Should we be deeply involved in this?

  • Christine: For ArchivesSpace right now, testing this feature won’t be available for at least one month

 

Defining the First Tier of Support

  • Perhaps the ability to both import and export could define this?

  • Any first tier metadata standard shouldn’t just be functional, but optimal

  • EAD3 is functional, but not all of the tags are used fully

  • Cannot import and export DACS in ArchivesSpace

  • For structural metadata, the first tier should still be import and export

  • If this turns out not to be a possible goal, then review this and we loosen the definition of first tier

 

Defining the Second Tier of Support

  • Any sort of basic compliance with exports (such as exporting EAD3 records which are valid)

  • The records here will be much more minimal

  • We might want to specify that these are archival or library cataloging standards, not broader technical standard (e. g. JSON exports of data)

 

We are to review these tier definitions at the next call, and finalize them

 

Published Metadata Mappings

  • This Subteam cannot complete this entirely

  • Updating the published mappings and maintaining them better over time with each ASpace release or update to metadata standards

 

Existing Mappings

  • To what extent does our charge include those standards which are specific to libraries and archives?

  • Prioritize what is specific to archival standards

  • EAC-CPF export should be considered a priority for this also

 

Methodology for Evaluating Mapping

 

Universal Export Record Testing

  • Want more than one possible set of field values to be tested

  • Attach multiple dates, ranges, multiple extents

  • Want to ensure that various types of field values are tested

 

Testing Importing Records

  • Unreasonable to ask everyone to submit one?

  • Do we want just 2-3?

  • Someone had a repository of strange EADs

  • We to at least document that we don’t import certain elements

  • Should keep this scoped fairly reasonably

  • Kevin can volunteer for MARCXML records

  • Pulling together sample EAD records: Jared will look for UC Davis

 

Article: Double Shoehorn Article from Harvard

  • Analysis of what worked and what did not

 

Next Step

  • How are we going to check that the import/export behavior is what we expect it to be?

  • We need to be able to document and sustain this

  • We could try round-tripping records, or just have this as a task

  • Task: Determine what process do we need to use to test this

  •  

Goals for Next Time

We will need to draft a separate work plan task to encompass and assign the following mapping evaluation steps:

  • Dividing up elements to check

  • Check fields that can be easily checked

  • Isolating import fields that are more challenging to check

 

Publishing the Results of the Evaluation for the Metadata Mapping

  • We don’t have a task for publishing the mappings

  • We need to determine how to publish these

  • Question for core committers group: How to synchronize this with the development reviews

  • Greg will bring this up during the next core committer group meeting

 

DACS import support

  • To the extent that new DACS fields are added, we will need to track the decisions of the TS-DACS council

 

Reviewing metadata-related development tickets

  • Maggie and Lydia created a new JIRA issue label

  • Standing item: We will review tickets every call

 

Mechanism for feedback

  • Table this for the moment, while the mapping work becomes the highest priority

 

Scheduling Future Meetings

  • Kevin will send around a Doodle Poll for a monthly meeting time

  • We can also just have a rotating, standing meeting

 

Meeting adjourned at 13:50 PDT/16:50 EDT