http://www.loc.gov/catdir/bibcontrol/lc_amega_final_report.pdf
Apologies
Debbie
-----Original Message-----
From: The CETIS Metadata Special Interest Group
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Debbie Campbell
Sent: Thursday, 14 April 2005 2:47 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: cordra - the aside
Andy,
You are right in one sense of course. The reason I mentioned
PictureAustralia is because *every* record contains a link to a
resource. In catalogues the opposite is true. But perhaps that is
historical and will change.
As to whether metadata is content, I merely provide here the latest
reference which states that: "A bibliographic surrogate can also be
considered content". Section 3.2.1 in The Final Report for the AMeGA
(Automatic Metadata Generation Applications) Project
www.nsf.gov/nsb/meetings/2005/LLDDC_draftreport.pdf
In our current Australian higher education sector projects implementing
institutional repositories, eg., ARROW www.arrow.edu.au it is becoming
clear that research content may not necessarily be hosted in the
purpose-built repository. The FEDORA architecture (and many others) will
allow links with metadata. The content may just be somewhere on a
university's Web site.
For nomenclature, the term 'digital archive' seems to convey the best
understood meaning when we talk about what the ARROW project will be
creating. 'Digital' to indicate not physical, but the term 'archive'
doesn't seem to be misconstrued. 'Repository' in the other hand, is.
So, if metadata and links are content, then they form a repository.
OAIster of course is larger still.
Cheers,
Debbie
Debbie Campbell
Director, Coordination Support Branch
National Library of Australia
Parkes Place
Canberra ACT 2600
Australia
em: [log in to unmask]; ph: +61 2 6262 1673; fx: +61 2 6273 2545
Australia's Research Online www.arrow.edu.au
|