Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.
Comment: Migrated to Confluence 4.0

Proposed list of metadata fields to drive the discovery and delivery of document level objects

The following is a list of descriptive, technical and administrative metadata that may accompany a document in Hypatia.  Documents can be either a single file or a grouping of files that exist together in either a folder, a zipped archive or a disk image.  Not all documents will necessarily have metadata for all of these metadata fields.

Field Name

ISAD(G) Element

Description

Searchable?

Facet?

Display?

Sortable?

Allow edit?

Metadata Source

 

 

Fields required for Standards-Compliant Archival Description

 

 

 

 

 

 

Repository

ISDIAH 5.1.2

Name of archival unit responsible for the collection.

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

 

collection object

collection call number

3.1.1

 

Maybe

Yes

Yes

Yes

 

collection object

collection title

3.1.2

 

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

 

collection object

accession number

 

 

No

No

Maybe?

No

Yes

?

Document identifier

3.1.1

 

Yes

No

Yes

Maybe

No

autogenerated

archival context

 

Location of the document in an intellectual arrangement (series, subseries, etc.)

No

Yes (with collection title)

Yes

No

Yes (archivist)

FTK / Parent object(s) / EAD

Level of description

3.1.4

Identifies the level of arrangement of the unit of description

No

Maybe

Yes

No

Yes (archivist)

 

Conditions governing access (facet)

3.4.1

To provide information on the legal status or other regulations that restrict or affect access to the unit of description. Peter: I used the following controlled vocabulary for AR - Access restrictions:  AR:Owner; AR:Archivist;   AR:Invited person; AR:Public; AR:Reading room

Yes (need controlled vocabulary)

Yes

Yes

Maybe

Yes (archivist)

FTK?

Conditions governing access (note)

3.4.1

To provide information on the legal status or other regulations that restrict or affect access to the unit of description. Peter: I used the following controlled vocabulary for AR - Access restrictions:  AR:Owner; AR:Archivist;   AR:Invited person; AR:Public; AR:Reading room

Maybe

No

Yes

No

Yes (archivist)

EAD?

Conditions governing use/reproduction

3.4.2

 

Yes (need controlled vocabulary)

Yes

Yes

Maybe

Yes (archivist)

FTK / EAD

Conditions governing use/reproduction (note)

3.4.2

 

Maybe

No

Yes

No

Yes (archivist)

EAD

Scope and contents

3.3.1

 

Yes

No

Yes

No

Yes

 

Creator

3.2.1

 

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes (archivist)

FTK / parent object(question)

subject heading, name, etc. (manually assigned)

 

 

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes (archivist)

FTK /

subjects, name, place (software generated)

 

 

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Yes (archivist)

Entity extraction software/service (e.g. OpenCalais)

Citation

 

 

No

No

Yes

No

Yes (archivist)

 

document title

3.1.2

Title supplied by archivist describing the document

Yes

No

Yes

Yes

Yes (archivist)

EAD?

document date

3.1.3

Is this the creation date or last modified date.  Do we need both?

Yes

Yes (need both)

Yes

Yes

 

FTK / Ingest

document size

3.1.5

Indicates the file or document's size on a filesystem

No

No

Yes

No

 

FTK / Ingest

 

 

Additional fields required for assets

 

 

 

 

 

 

source media

3.4.4

Description of the physical carrier for a record (floppy disk, hard disk, etc.) Peter: I used the following controlled vocabulary for CM - Computer media: CM:5.25 floppy; CM:3.5 floppy; CM:Punch card; CM: CD/DVD; CM: Hard Drive; CM: Zip Disk: CM:Tape; CM: Cloud Storage;

No

Yes (need controlled vocabulary)

Yes

No

 

FTK /

operating system and version (if known)

3.4.4

Peter: I think this field is not necessary. Also, I don't know any tools I can get this info. Files can be created by different os and stored in 1 computer.

 

 

 

 

 

 

document type

 

Controlled value list.  Is this a text document, image, audio, video, forensic image etc. Where is this list coming from? Peter: I used the following controlled vocabulary for FT - Format Type: FT:Document; FT:Spreadsheet; FT:Computer Program; FT:Image; FT: Video; FT: Audio; FT: Email

No

Yes (need controlled vocabulary)

Yes

No

Yes (archivist)

FTK /

file or document name

 

Document or file name assigned to an object by an operating system

Yes

No

Yes

No

Maybe

FTK / Ingest

document location

 

Location of the document on a filesystem.  This is different from the archival location of a document in a series / subseries.

No

No

Yes

No

 

FTK /

mime type (original)

3.4.4

The mime type indicates the type of document and may indicate the application that was used to create the document

Maybe

No

Maybe

No

 

Ingest

mime type (presentation version)

 

 

No

Maybe

Maybe

No

 

Ingest

application software and version (if known)

3.4.4

 

No

No

Yes

No

Yes (archivist)

FTK / 

thumbnail image

 

image that represents the document type (eg. PDF, text, image etc.) Peter: If the file is an image, it should be the relative thumbnail.

No

No

Yes

No

 

FTK for image thumbnail /

"Download" this

 

button that allows the archivist or end user to download the document (if permitted)Peter: We may also consider adding digital signature of the institution to the files.

No

No

Yes

No

No

 

checksum

 

 

No

No

Yes

No

No

FTK / Ingest

Take-down request / policy

 

 

No

No

Yes

No

Yes (public for request)

Web UI

Original file

 

 

No

No

Yes

No

No

 

Display version of the original file

 

 

No

No

Yes

No

No

 

Presentation format history

 

Automated? piece to say that original file X was converted by Person Y using software Z on this date

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

User-generated content

 

 

 

 

 

 

annotations ("stories")

 

 

No

No

Yes

No

Yes (creator / invited public / public)

Web UI

archivist created tag

 

tags that archivists/curators add - become facets (How are these different from access points)

 

yes

 

 

 

Web UI

creator tag

 

tags by creator - become facets by creator (How are these different from access points)

 

yes

 

 

 

Web UI

(pre-)approved user tag

 

tags that are added by approved users outside of the repository/library - should show up in facet as similar to an approved editor in Wikipedia (?)

 

yes

 

 

 

Web UI

user created tag

 

tags created by non-approved users; might go through vetting process by repository/library or be listed as unverfied/unvetted editor (like Wikipedia?)

 

?

 

 

 

Web UI