Meta-whata?

Metadata = data about data.

It seems that everyone is jumping on the metadata bandwagon. Libraries, individuals, publishers, and others are using metadata as a source of publicity. By using current and industry-driven metadata libraries are able to propel their collection into the arms of anyone with an Internet connection because they have the right metadata.

In two articles over metadata the importance of metadata still stands and through the advancement of schema and searchability, more items can now be accessible.

The first article Understanding Metadata and Metadata Schemes by Jane Greenberg analyzed current schemas with the MODAL (Metadata Objectives and principles, Domain, and Architectural Layout) framework. MODAL helps relay the value of schema framework.

This article concluded defining specifically a metadata scheme can prove to be a greater challenge and the MODAL framework is the best way to study the complexity of metadata scheme. The MODAL framework is also a useful aid in metadata scheme design because it focuses on the features that are specific to metadata.

Through further study it would prove that the best way to handle such a complex topic is through frameworks such as the MODAL framework and divide, categorize, and analyze the topics pertinence.

Alan Dawson and Val Hamilton wrote Optimising Metadata to Make High-Value Content More Accessible to Google Users. This article was very interesting in the respect that libraries are now more than every willing to step out on the limb to make their content and collection known. Dawson and Hamilton concluded that now publishers are indexing their content to help meet the standards for users of the search engine Google. By changing their procedures to increase access to their content is evidence of the “On Demand” society.

Dawson and Hamilton also concluded that libraries and other institutions can follow those steps to help with accessibility. By adding additional tags or changing the metadata schema millions of users could have access to the particular institution’s information without ever visiting their website and have Google.com as the middle man.

Both of the articles still bring up the constant worry of lack of standardization amongst libraries and other institutions. Different schemes are created and others are thrown to the curb without really any hope for a common scheme. This is difficult to ensure usability and accessibility. Having a limited knowledge on several schemes is not as powerful as having extensive knowledge on one schemes. I understand the need for various schemes but not understand why there is not a common ground for schemes when it comes to searchability on the Internet. I now guess that with Google.com having their say on the type of scheme they prefer, more and more institutions will be using one standard form.