People who embed their metadata into the resource document can still do 1:1 metadata creation. That's what the discussion on surrogate documents was about, some time back. The 1:1 "rule of thumb" applies just as well to a collection of photographs of paintings as it does to a collection of paintings, or a set of memorabilia involving a particular event (say, the Olympics or one particular
instance of that regular event).
"I've never been able to before" just doesn't cut it as an excuse for not doing it now.
"I don't feel that it's of value" is a reason for not going to the expense (time, effort, money) of preparing Metadata sets for everything in your collection that has potential value. However, I think you should be prepared to accept new metadata sets from third parties, describing resources that you haven't already allocated metadata to.
If you're running a newspaper, you need to know exactly who took which photo, or what collection you've bought it from. You may also need to know when the photo was taken, and what equipment was used. This kind of information is especially useful when the Police come knocking on your door to collect forensic evidence (eg: the photo in your article shows a bunch of youths hanging around a
car which was later looted).
It's a case of allocating metadata to the stuff you care enough about to allocate metadata to, embedded or not.
Regards,
Alex Satrapa
Leif Andresen wrote:
> To DC-general list
>
> Of course embedded metadata are harvested into different types of databases. But people making embedded metadata are describing their own information about the resource embed*ded in the resource and don*t have the choice between one or more than one records = the choice not using 1:1 or using 1:1.
>
> Other people than the creators of the metadata use this information for making databases. Of course they can generate more than one record based on one set of metadata in one resource. But if you are working with a cross-domain database about ressources on the net (e.g. with useful information for answering borrowers' requests in a library) you will generate one record for one resource.
>
> My opion is that only for decribing a very limited number of records can the 1:1 have any practical use. I am sure it can be very useful for a collection of resources with photographs of paintings.
>
> It is not without reason that librarians are doing analytical catalogueing, we are making extra records for parts of the publication (e.g. articles in a book) -not records for e.g. events described in a book or all the single photographs.
>
> Regards
> Leif
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|