Content and Context
PDF
Received 2022-03-01
Accepted 2022-07-01
Published 2022-07-18
Bookmark and Share

Abstract

This paper demonstrates how taking differences in end user behavior and differing interdepartmental perspectives on metadata into account can strengthen the digital object workflow to serve a greater variety of users. The University of Illinois Chicago University Library has successfully collaborated on metadata initiatives since establishing a cross-departmental Metadata Working Group. The article examines the perspectives of archivists, digital librarians, and catalogers on digital object metadata. It outlines the workflow established to enable each of these stakeholders to contribute their unique strengths to metadata and considers how bringing those strengths together serves different end user groups. It presents two examples of this workflow in action and considers the next steps for improving that workflow. Future efforts to strengthen the content/context balance of metadata are discussed in three areas: aggregated digitization and description, technology enhancements, and moving from a linear to a circular workflow model.

https://doi.org/10.23974/ijol.2022.vol7.1.234
PDF

References

Allison-Bunnell, J., Cresci Callahan, M., Gueguen, G., Kunze, J., Matiusak, K., Wiedeman, G. (2021). Lost Without Context: Representing Relationships between Archival Materials in the Digital Environment. In M. Matienzo & D. Handel (Eds.), The Lighting the Way Handbook: Case Studies, Guidelines and Emergent Futures for Archival Discovery and Delivery (pp. 55-72). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Libraries. https://doi.org/10.25740/gg453cv6438

Anderson, M., Exckard, M., Griffin, M. Hastings, M., Kulczak, D. Powell, C., Virakhovskaya, O., Wells, C. and Windon, K. (2021). Facilitating Seamless Access Through Collaborative Workflows, Advocacy and Communication, In M. Matienzo & D. Handel (Eds.), The Lighting the Way Handbook: Case Studies, Guidelines and Emergent Futures for Archival Discovery and Delivery (pp. 39-52). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Libraries. https://doi.org/10.25740/gg453cv6438

Austin, D. (2003). CITY2000: A holistic approach to administering image resources. Journal of Library Administration, 39(2–3), 5-13. https://doi.org/10.1300/J111v39n02_02

Bogaard, T., Hollink, L., Wielemaker, J., van Ossenbruggen, J., & Hardman, L. (2019). Metadata categorization for identifying search patterns in a digital library. Journal of Documentation, 75(2), 270-286. https://doi.org/10.1108/JD-06-2018-0087

Chassanoff, A. (2018). Historians experience using digitized archival photographs as evidence. The American Archivist, 81(1), 135-164. https://doi.org/10.17723/0360-9081-81.1.135

Conway, P., & Punzalan, R. (2011). Fields of vision: toward a new theory of visual literacy for digitized archival photographs. Archivaria, 71(Spring), 63-97.

Darcovich, J., Flynn, K., & Li, M. (2019). Born of collaboration:

The evolution of metadata standards in an aggregated environment. Visual Resources Association Bulletin, 45(2), Article 5. https://online.vraweb.org/index.php/vrab/article/view/35/33

Fukumoto, T. (2006). An analysis of image retrieval behavior for metadata type image database. Information Processing & Management, 42(3), 723-728.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2005.01.008

Getty Research Institute. (n.d.). Edward Ruscha photographs of Sunset Boulevard and Hollywood Boulevard, 1965-2010. Getty research collections viewer. Retrieved June 22, 2022, from https://www.getty.edu/research/collections/collection/100001

Goodale, P., David Clough, P., Fernando, S., Ford, N., & Stevenson, M. (2014). Cognitive styles within an exploratory search system for digital libraries. Journal of Documentation, 70(6), 970-996.https://doi.org/10.1108/JD-03-2014-0045

Greene, M. and Meissner, D. (2005) More product, less process: Revamping traditional archival processing. The American Archivist, 68(2), 208-263. https://doi.org/10.17723/aarc.68.2.c741823776k65863

Ho, J. (2020). The roles of cataloging vs. non-cataloging librarians and staff in non-MARC metadata related workflows: a survey of academic libraries in the United States. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 58(8), 728-768. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639374.2020.1863889

Hunter, N., Legg, K., & Oehlerts, B. (2010). Two librarians, an archivist, and 13,000 images: Collaborating to build a digital collection. The Library Quarterly, 80(1), 186-197. https://doi.org/10.1086/648464

Maron, N., & Pickle, S. (2013). Appraising our digital investment: Sustainability of digitized special collections in ARL libraries. Association of Research Libraries.

Matusiak, K. (2006). Information Seeking behavior in digital image collections: a cognitive approach. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 32(5), 479-488. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2006.05.009

Matusiak, K., (2012). Perceptions of usability and usefulness of digital libraries. Journal of Humanities & Arts Computing: a Journal of Digital Humanities, 6(1-2), 133-147. https://doi.org/10.3366/ijhac.2011.0044

Niu, J. (2015). Archival intellectual control in the digital age. Journal of Archival Organization, 12(3/4), 186-197. https://doi.org/10.1080/15332748.2015.1154747

Passehl-Stoddart, E. (2018). Playfulness in the Archives: Enhancing Digital Collections through Card Sorting. The Reading Room 2(1), 39-54.

Sweester, M., & Orchard, A. (2019). Are we coming together? The archival descriptive landscape and the roles of archivist and cataloger. The American Archivist, 82(2), 331-380. https://doi.org/10.17723/aarc-82-02-18

Therrell, G. (2019). More product, more process: Metadata in digital image collections. Digital Library Perspectives, 35(1), 2-14. https://doi.org/10.1108/DLP-06-2018-0018

United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. (n.d.). Hafftka and Jonisch families photographs. Search our collections. Retrieved Juen 22, 2022, from https://collections.ushmm.org/search/catalog/irn551417#?rsc=170700&cv=0&c=0&m=0&s=0&xywh=-823%2C-88%2C2676%2C1753

Xie, I., Joo, S., & Matusiak, K. (2018). Multifaceted evaluation criteria of digital libraries in academic settings: Similarities and differences from different stakeholders. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 44(6), 854-863. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2018.09.002

Zhang, J. (2012). Archival representation in the digital age. Journal of Archival Organization, 10(1), 45-68. https://doi.org/10.1080/15332748.2012.677671

Zhang, J., & Mauney, D. (2013). When archival description meets digital object metadata: A typological study of digital archive representation. The American Archivist, 76(1), 174-195. https://doi.org/10.17723/aarc.76.1.121u85342062w155

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.