Campaign: Consistency

Broad principles not tight prescriptions

The changes in technology, the diversity of cataloguing practice,

the diversity of ownership and legal considerations and the

possibilities for metadata to be created remotely all mean that

acceptable and achievable recommendations for consistency between

repositories are likely to be broad principles with examples of good

practice rather than prescriptive rules or precise recommendations.

Submitted by (@nf0000)

Voting

16 votes
Active

Campaign: Consistency

Metadata will increasingly be created remotely at the point of need

Far from becoming irrelevant, metadata for repository items will

become more important but it will increasingly be created and assigned

remotely. This will be by automated procedures such as indexing and

text analysis and also by users and readers, through the use of

tagging mechanisms. These developments will have implications for

consistency between repositories and between items.

Submitted by (@nf0000)

Voting

10 votes
Active

Campaign: Consistency

We should manage, not embrace, inconsistency

Inconsistency is a fact of life, and any repository instance or system that wants to avoid bottlenecks is going to have to accept items that have inconsistent metadata (and possibly inconsistent formats and policies, though consistency in those areas may be easier or more important to enforce). That doesn't mean you have to settle for it, though. It's possible to take a progressive approach, where messy metadata comes ...more »

Submitted by (@ockerblo)

Voting

8 votes
Active

Campaign: Consistency

Minimal metadata for sharing?

For all practical purposes, the ability to express metadata as the

Dublin Core metadata elements is a sufficient baseline for sharing

repository items across subject and institutional domains.

Submitted by (@nf0000)

Voting

-12 votes
Active