Meeting Minutes for 02/20/2018

Digital Archive Meeting
February 20, 2018
1:00 - 2:10 PM
Islandora  updates
  • final clean-up on Red Book, set up for Mesa County
  • consistent display of Red book (EVLD) pages
  • Pagination in scrollers: was by title, now by page # or however user decides
  • 970West Collection: video & music in Digital Archive; switch back between listening, video
  • Download functionality changes
    • - new restrictions available using “Restrict Access” at bottom of form
    • - by home library, IP 
    • - “patronsfrom” - only particular patrons
    • -ptypes: special access for particular users by Ptype (restricting temp patrons, etc.) 
    • - documentation hopefully complete by next DAC meeting 
    • - not configured yet for audio, video files
    • - more options available for verified/master/derivative downloads
Map exhibits
  • Not live yet 
  • Art Around Town w/ Vail: preview art exhibits, displays by location on a Google map, then click tags for the dig. Archive entity page
Metadata Working Group (report doc from Lacy, group attached)
Impressions for Power User Group:
  • Nicole (ASU): Helpful because of so many jobs, tasks, so this would be a good way to keep standards in line with everyone
  • Joy asked “Would members of this group be the middleman, so to speak, before a record is imported into the system?”
  • Jill clarified that this is to be “a group to come to with questions, to provide help to all DAC members so that everything doesn't land squarely on Jordan” 
  • Lacy reiterated that yes, we are trying to circumvent the emails and questions to Jordan and if there are other people in an elevated position to look at these types of problems. The PUG isn’t to be ‘oversight’, per se.
  • General agreement is that we are on the same page (working group and larger DAC), this is useful, and a PUG is a good idea to continue discussion and further plans. More training and know-how with members is always useful. Others mentioned they are new, or still thinking about these concepts, and may have more to offer later. 
Working Group Started with Place Entities
  • Illustrates how complicated, confusing this plan can become
  • Display Name: decided that we should include as much information as possible, and this includes the county in the display name
    • Example: Not “Eagle, Colorado”, but “Eagle, Eagle County, Colorado”
  • This follows along with the idea of minimum and ideal standards:
    • Minimum = what you need to enter to create an entity
    • Ideal = adding more information to make entity more purposeful, rich 
  • “Alternate name” vs. “Same Place As”
  • Question: Is the working group’s perception of these delineations shared with the larger DAC? 
    • Answer: Yes.
  • Alternate names are a nickname or place for ‘local flavor’ when used in discretion
  • “Same Place As” is defined as two separate places that have shared the same location. 
    • Example: Sears Tower and Willis Tower. The Willis Tower is not a new tower, it is the Sears Tower. These are two separate entities made different by dates, not location. 
Non-traditional places:
  • Colorado River
  • Upper Arkansas River (Joy offered this example)
    • How do we pinpoint these ‘places’ when they go through multiple states/areas?
    • What information do we include in their display name: county? State? 
    • Area for more discussion in metadata standards working group
Had to cut for time
Archives classes: 
Lacy mentioned that she applied to host an archives class in Avon through SAA, hoping to find topics that are relevant to our group in case others want a more localized professional development opportunity
Round Robin: 
  • Mary - new to group, first meeting. Welcome!
  • Steamboat - no news, permissions to delete entities would be a great addition
  • CMC  - final versions for a book project received related to 50th anniversary project
  • EVLD - no news 
  • Fort lewis - putting in Homer Root journals 
  • Gunnison - slowly finishing up Cattleman’s days, lost some volunteers
  • Mesa- Second band for the Studio Lounge collection will be released this week. 
  • Carol - waiting for problems to be figured out 
  • Salida- halfway through bob pierce collection,  new negative digital scanner
  • Vail - no Jo
  • Western State - no news
Next Meeting: March 20th 
Metadata Standards Working Group
2 Meetings with members: 
Alysa & John - Steamboat
Elizabeth - Mesa
Amy - State Library
Jill - Gunnison
Liz - Pine River
  • A good mix of different levels of participation
  • Acknowledged that we are missing an academic library source, so we may need to consult further about decisions, changes that affect these types of materials specifically
Our Mission:  Curate and maintain a fluid framework outlining metadata standards for entity creation and metadata entry that supports strong linked data and the “critical mass” of Digital Archive. 
Focus: Entities, not objects 
Goals: Assist Marmot in documentation, training for cohesive standards; create a benchmark consensus on how to approach metadata and entity creation
Best Practices” →  “Metadata Standards
 - A general consensus that we want this to be taken seriously. “Standards” infers a stronger tone toward the importance of our metadata
Where/How We’re Proceeding:
  •  Working through each entity type. Place:  Person:   Org:
  •  Using current training documentation from Marmot
  •  Current notes on “Add A___” metadata forms 
  •  Metadata form for each entity creation, field-by-field
  • Duplicates are a current problem, but in the future, we will not dump large amounts of unchecked metadata into system 
  • “Authority” entities are unnecessary and we want to encourage collaboration in entity creation 
  • Analogies between Islandora/Pika objects and Sierra/Pika records and items 
  • Entity = Bib Record, Object = Item Record
Should Islandora have a higher level of user group to maintain and ‘enforce’ certain standards? 
“Enforce” is a stronger term than intended 
Metadata standards should align with training documents 
  • Use our committee & working group as the user input to Marmot and member library training 
  1. Do we as a group want to enforce a certain level of training before someone is allowed to create entities? 
  • OCLC has a team of catalogers with higher exec power who do large-scale updates to records 
  1. Should Islandora have a “power user group”? 
  • What permissions do they have?
  • Do we have different training or abilities necessary to be part of this group?
  • Possible tasks for this group could be:
    • Find+Replace permissions
      • Function to quickly correct larger issues in metadata
      • Issues: Better for larger issues or mistakes in metadata; errors can affect a larger amount of data
      • Related mostly to migration/large collection ingest issues 
    • Delete permissions
      • Allowing this group to delete in Islandora 
      • Issues: finality (quick choice, irreversible decision), “spot clean” option, cannot choose permissions between users, only organization  We can do this permission for specific users--but--then they can delete/edit any objects, not just limited to organization
    • Make further determinations in creation of entities
      • Currently: Wikipedia rule 
    • Who? 
      • Based on training, knowledge
      • DAC chairperson 
      • _____ ?
Important points:
  • Balance permissions
  • Informed group of users 
  • Clearly defined goals, responsibilities of this position/group 
Group: Initial impressions to a ‘power user group’ in Islandora
Metadata Standards: Place Entities 
  • Started with the “Add a Place” form, field-by-field 
  • Warning: this is going to be a slow process
  • “Display Name” - Formatting 
  • City, state 
  • What is easiest for users?  Eagle, Colorado OR Eagle, Eagle County, Colorado 
  • Both are in our current system
  • ‘Non-traditional’ places
  • Colorado River =     “Colorado River, United States”
  • Brush Creek =         “Brush Creek, Eagle County, Colorado”
  • Hanging Lake =       “Hanging Lake, Garfield County, Colorado” 
  • “Subject Authorities” 
    • Addressed “Local” authorities option
      • Another example of where current Marmot training, documentation is in line with what we want, need from users  
“Alternate Name” 
Group: What does “alternate” mean to you? “Same Place As”? 
Our group: Nickname, ‘local flavor’ in some cases (not personal preference) 
“Same Place As” 
Sears Tower & Willis Tower
  • Two separate entities, one place 
  • Difference made by dates 
  • Including each ensures that they will be related, but different (If you search “sears tower” on Google, it shows “Willis Tower” as first search result) 
Camp Hale & Pando, Colorado
  • Two separate entities, one place
  • Camp Hale was a military base during World War II constructed at…. 
  • Pando, Colorado - civilian community 
Group: Other examples? Questions,thoughts about Same Place As/Alternate?  
Meeting Date: 
Tuesday, 2018, February 20
Documentation Type: