Macarminutes22 08 2008


Metadata Advisory Committee for Australian Repositories (MACAR) Meeting 2

22nd August, 2007, Telemeeting, 2.00 pm**

1. Attendance and apologies


KB - Katie Blake - ARROW Central (Co convenor)

JG - Joan Gray - ARROW Central (Co convenor) & (Minute taker)

AH - Ann Huthwaite - Eprints

NG - Neil Godfrey - Rubric

SM - Susanne Moir - State Library of NSW

JB - John Butera - Swinburne University

HW - Helen Wolff – Swinburne University

TR - Tom Ruthven - UNSW/ADT

KS - Kate Sergeant - University of SA

AD - Alison Dellit – National Discovery Service

SM – Simon McMillan – Univesity of New England

BW – Belinda Weaver – University of Queensland

Apologies: Angela Lang (ARROW Central), Scott Yeadon (ANU), Graham Reynolds (DEST), Kerry Blinco

2. Review of the minutes from previous meeting

Minutes of meeting of 22nd May 2007 - accepted

3. Review of the work of Group 1 and acceptance of the principles and the vocabulary

JG summarized the findings of Group 1. She reported that 2 documents including a proposed type vocabulary and principles and best practice guidelines were produced and shared with other MACAR members. 2 teleconferences on 13 June and 11 July were held at which working documents were tabled and followed by email discussion. Topics covered included terminology, content vs carrier types, RQF research output types, vocabulary structure – flat or hierarchical, interoperability, level of granularity, etc Our investigation of eg ‘thesis’ found that there wasn’t agreement on the generic type thesis vs dissertation as some institutions use these terms interchangeably while definitions for more granular terms such as doctorals, masters, professional doctorates etc were institution specific also. The impact of the RQF and the need to describe a variety of research outputs was an important consideration and a key driver for some of the terms selected. The discussion broadened to arguments for and against multiple resource types and whether this was compatible with MACAR goals, interoperability and various repository solutions. The rationale for a type vocabulary was again revisited with active discussion by a number of group members.

Google docs was used to work collaboratively on the documents.

HW asked if there was scope to add new terms to the vocabulary. It was agreed that such terms could be reviewed and included if needed.

SM asked if a rule about capitalization could be included. JG said this could be part of the best practice guidelines. There were already some examples which showed use of terms in the metadata record.

Action: JG to add this rule to the guidelines.

Action: KB agreed to publish documents on google groups, websites and other appropriate publications.

4. Review of the work of Group 2 and acceptance of its findings

Tom Ruthven reported that Group 2 met by Teleconference on 12 June with a follow-up email on 30 July. The Group decided there are no specific metadata requirements related to access control in the RQF Technical Specifications. Restricting access to an RQF assessor would be at the datastream level for a research output not a metadata element. The Group noted that there are required metadata elements to describe a research output for the RQF assessment. The Group discussed data collection needs for research reporting other than the RQF such as including RFCD codes and possible used of “type”. It agreed to survey Australian university repositories on data collection needs for other research reporting requirements. The survey has not yet taken place.

The other members felt that Group 2 should go ahead with the survey. There may be other reporting requirements in the repository community that may need to be captured in the metadata record eg SEO (Socio-economic objective) classifications etc

Action: TR agreed to post a message on the Google lists about the survey.

5. Appointment of a new representative from APSR to replace Chris Blackall

KB reported that Chris Blackall has left APSR and has taken up a new appointment at the National Gallery.

KB has been discussing a replacement for MACAR with Adrian Burton at APSR and he has nominated Scott Yeadon.

6. Assignments of priorities for Group 3 (templates and crosswalks)

KB reported that this group has not yet met. It is tasked with developing metadata tools for use with Australian repositories, reflecting the work of Working Groups 1 and 2. ARROW’s central register and RUBRIC’s toolkit currently provide template data and crosswalks. Group 3 will look at these and create new spreadsheets with data elements and their equivalents in DC, MARC and MODS for the new resource types. We anticipate that a good start will be made by October 6th.

It was agreed that the first priority of this group would be to work with the resource types within scholarly texts with the possible exception of patents. The next priority should be images, both still and moving.

It was also noted that for ARROW members, Fabulous – the new bulk editing tool could be used to globally change fields in existing records if required.

Action: KB to email Group 3 members about priorities and work schedule.

7. Promulgation of our findings

7.1. KB reported that there is already a link to MACAR on the ARROW website. Cathrine Harbor-Ree (University Librarian/Monash University) has agreed for this link to be put there.

Action: AL to maintain these pages.

7.2 ALIA has also agreed to host a web page on their site. It was agreed that ALIA was best because repositories are not just higher education and research based. The National Library of Australia is involved, the State Library of New South Wales has a repository, other education sectors are also interested. CAUL was also contacted but CAUL decided it was best hosted by ALIA.

Action: AL to follow up with ALIA.

7.3 KB asked if Google docs was working for us ? It was noted that it is difficult to track versions and also to add people and share, otherwise ok. Will leave and see how it works.

7.4 KB asked if we needed a separate wiki and it was concluded that we didn’t need it at this stage.

7.5.To publicise the various sites it was agreed that we would ask ALIA to do this via their email list, Kerry Webb’s page in Incite and Arthur Sale’s Ozeprints list.

Action: KB to follow up publicity with ALIA and its affiliated distribution lists.

8. Requests for membership

KB noted that there have been requests for involvement by several groups. These include University of Tasmania , and Evan Bailey, Centre for Learning Innovation.

[Graham Reynolds is the new DEST member and Jenny Millea from the Carrick Exchange is an associate member]

9. Next meeting

There was no further business. Meeting closed at 2.55 pm. ARROW to organise next meeting of all members and Group 3 to report on progress.

Unless otherwise stated, the content of this page is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License