(40% of Final Grade)
Draft due: 3/4
Define the scope of the resources you plan to describe in your project (i.e., the type and content of your resources, the approximate number of resources). It might be helpful to give examples of resources that are within the scope of your project as well as examples of resources you consider to be out of scope. Keep in mind that this can be as large in scale as you want--you will write all documentation as though you are carrying out a metadata project at the scale proposed, but for the purposes of the course project, you will only need to submit metadata for 20 of your resources.
What is the purpose of this description project? Who is the audience? Describe the anticipated users and uses of your resources. What properties of your resources will you describe to support the anticipated use?
Use any format you like to answer the what, why, and who of your metadata project. This document will serve as an introduction to the rest of your project documentation.
(1 page max., single-spaced)
Grading criteria:
- Scope, audience, and user tasks are clearly defined.
- Specific user tasks are described and supporting metadata elements are discussed.
- Draft has been submitted.
Draft due: 3/11
List and briefly describe all standards and vocabularies you'll use in your project as well as a justification for each (i.e. how this standard supports the purposes of your project). This should include: structural standards/record formats, content standards, encoding standards, data serialization formats, and controlled vocabularies.
(1 page max., single-spaced)
Grading criteria:
- Choices of structural standards, content standards (formal or informal), value vocabularies and syntax encondings, and serializations are all discussed.
- Draft has been submitted.
Draft due: 4/1
Provide a structured, human-readable guide to usage and interpretation of the data elements used in your project. You may organize it however you like, but you must include, at minimum, a definition, brief usage guidelines, obligation, repeatability, and value/syntax encoding (if applicable) or value vocabularies used for each element. Examples are helpful and highly recommended, but not required.
Grading criteria:
- Includes guidance on how to read the data dictionary.
- Dictionary is clearly written and easy to navigate.
- Includes, at minimum, a definition, brief usage guidelines, obligation, repeatability, and value/syntax encoding or value vocabularies used for each element.
- Draft has been submitted.
Draft due: 4/8
Describe in detail how your metadata will be created. For example, if your metadata will be 'handcrafted,' describe the process, tools, file formats, etc. your metadata creators will use. Include any input guidelines your metadata creators will need to complete this task. If you are repurposing existing metadata, describe the processes and tools you will use to harvest, collect, modify, and/or enhance your data. Cite any tools or scripts or, if writing your own, point to online documentation or include them in an Appendix of your final document. (If you do write your own tools or scripts, consider sharing them! https://github.com is a great place for this.)
Grading criteria:
- Guidance is clearly written with audience in mind.
- Includes guidance for all elements in data dictionary.
- Draft has been submitted.
Draft due: 4/22
Assess the importance of each of Bruce and Hillman's seven characteristics of quality to the purposes your metadata will support. For each characteristic, define the level of quality you will require in your metadata creation. What measures will you take to ensure compliance with each of your defined quality levels? Outline your plan for implementing these quality control measures.
Grading criteria:
- All seven quality indicators have been considered and acceptable levels of quality and importance of each is discussed.
- Includes concrete actions to take for assuring quality.
- Draft has been submitted.
Due with final draft.
In your final document, include a policy statement outlining how others may re-use your data. You may wish to apply one of the licenses we'll talk about in class.
Grading criteria:
Policy is concise and clearly written. The reader should have no question about what rights they have to reproduce, repurpose, or aggregate the metadata.
Draft due: 4/15
Provide examples of metadata for 2 resources. For the draft, send digital files in your metadata's data format. For the final draft, include human-readable examples within the text of your document.
Grading criteria:
- Examples are valid and clearly formatted for easy reading.
- Draft has been submitted.
Draft due: 4/29
You will crosswalk your metadata to our class schema (based on Qualified Dublin Core) for the purposes of class aggregation. Include notes for each data element, where necessary, to explain what steps you would take for normalizing your data values to fit the schema requirements. Also note where you are missing mandatory data elements and what steps you would take to provide them.
Use any format you like for your crosswalks (though tables are usually used for this type of documentation), but final drafts should be human-readable and easily printed (i.e., included within the text of your final document).
Grading criteria:
- Layout is clear and readable.
- Required elements are present and mapped.
- Includes the most specific source elements to be mapped (i.e., the element containing the value, not a parent wrapper element).
- Includes details of any normalizations needed to conform to the destination schema.
- Draft has been submitted.
Due 5/6 for Aggregation Party
Digital files for 20 of your resources described in the class schema (using your crosswalk).
Due with final draft
Digital file(s) for at least 20 resources described by your guidelines.
Grading criteria:
- Validates to the schema (if applicable).
- At least 20 records are submitted.
- Conforms to the specifications laid out in the data dictionary.
(10% of Final Grade)
Due with final draft--5/17 5pm
How well do you feel your choices in structural standards (i.e., schema, elements), content standards (formal or informal), value vocabularies (or lack thereof), and serialization supported your user tasks? What would you do differently in future projects? Cite readings from the course where appropriate.
(~2 p., single-spaced, give or take a 1/2 page)