My coursemate recently posted on their blog about posting on their blog, a metapost, if you will. So I’ll take the opportunity to post on my blog about the post on their blog about posting on their blog: a meta metapost.
In all seriousness, I must that I share some the hatred of blogging and tweeting – I only have Facebook because it’s impossible to contact people without it, but I also think that it was good to stretch my horizons in this way. I think the problem that I have is a mindset of “Only speak if you can improve the silence.” It’s hard to call the internet silent, but all analogies must breakdown somewhere! I think this gets to a core issue with the vastly connected world that we find ourselves in today. It seems that there are no longer small ponds for us to be big fish in.
My coursemate recently posted on EXIF metadata being used in our project to determine various contents for our metadata element. I was really glad that we got the change to use this information because EXIF metadata is one of the most accessible forms of metadata out there, but so many people do not know where or what it is or even how to access it.
Like my coursemate, I was also appy to have seen EXIF as its own presentation.
I really like the way that subject was handled for this repository. The drop down menu greatly expedited the pollution of the subject fields compared to the fine-grained, but often overwhelming Library of Congress Subject headings.
I wonder if this could be applied to large repositories to aid the work of paraprofessionals.
On a side note, looking at the subject heading made me slightly envious of DePol’s travels!
I think I’d like to make an mid-series introductory post in my series on metadata elements to explain some omissions from the DePol collection which were included in the football series, such as IndexerID and the identifier element.
This isn’t a slight on the creators of these metatdata or an implication that these elements are not useful to describe woodcuts, but rather they are so similar they would represent an egregious duplication of effort on my part. I, being on a never-ending quest for efficiency, simply could not allow this to happen!
I really like the integration on this element with http://www.geonames.org I had not previously been aware of this site and I found it to be increasingly useful and interesting. I also think that it provides a really fantastic functionality to our records. Also, philosophically it is interesting that the content for this metadata item is in itself a recourse which could have it’s very own metadata.
I have to say this element was really and truly fun. I really liked trying to figure out some of the more difficult to id players. It was frustrating on some when a player was a key… well player in a particular photograph, but whose identification was obscured or non-unique.
I was really surprised on how dependent this and other elements where on which team was touching the football. I certainly did not expect to have such a big impact on this element.
This element was one of the most challenging, if not the most challenging element for the football series. Firstly, it depended heavily on the other elements to be mostly complete so it tended to feel like the culmination of all my previous efforts. Secondly due to the nature of the photographs, which were all shot from the side, you only received a cross-section of any particular scenario. Also, in many pictures the football was obscured, which as I have learned whichever team has the football is a prerequisite knowledge for most aspects of football.
This was one of my favorite elements of all. I really liked exploring the Library of Congress Subject Headings and getting experience searching the authority files. What surprised me is how many entries were devoted to american football.
In this element I think that, baring the description element, we had the greatest amount of freedom and this is where our librarian training and instincts really get to shine!
I’ve put both the date elements under one blog post due to how similar they are.
Here’s another example of a perfectly written guideline on how to manually harvest the metadata from digital photographs. Also, I really appreciated the links to the Byrant Museum! It streamlined the indexing of these elements fantastically.
It was also great to see the different approaches that metadata professionals must take to born digital items versus those which have been made to represent an analog item – it’s much more simple to deal with the born digital items in this case!
I really loved the way the guidelines for this element were written they were extremely clear how to harvest the metadata for this element from the metadata already one the file.
I really loved how this synergized with the identifier element also, it made it extremely easy to match the file with the digital object as it exists in our collection.