DCC Minutes 10.14.15

Present: Lee Berry, Michelle DiMeo, Anna Headley, Hillary Kativa, Stephanie Lampkin, Cathleen Lu, Erin McLeary, Sarah Newhouse, Jim Voelkel

Absent: David Caruso, Patrick Shea, Andrea Tomlinson

User Testing Feedback

MD: Metadata template easiest to make changes now (can always do so later but want to address more now), feedback on how it all worked?

Add buttons and external ID

HK: Thought everything worked well overall, had a bit of confusion about the add buttons—thought clicking on ‘add’ value saved data instead of adding a blank

JV: Wanted to use ‘add’ button and dropdowns to add another field type—filled in author and then wanted to use ‘add’ to add title

-  Found ‘help’ button not helpful (DCC chimed in to clarify the button doesn’t have info yet)

-  External ID confusion of which ones to use for books

AH/CL: Will clarify source of ‘item’ and ‘bib’ for external ID field

-  Add barcode? No—data synchronization issues, call number also not useful the way CHF cataloging works, better to use item number

Date field

LB: Wasn’t sure how to use date field with start/end, multiple date sessions

CL: Some confusion over labels for one discrete date, use start/only?

File sizes and adding files to works

LB: Thinking about end of OH process, have pdf, word, audio files, and sometimes video, would like to bulk upload all of those components and then do metadata at once

-  Some WAV and video files were too big to upload—video files > 1G each, some audio > 500MB

MD: Structuring of files in background will depend on how OH wants to present and give access

JV: A whole tiny book was 1.6 gig, so maybe would need ~3-5 gigs for a regular book

-  Or ability to add additional files to existing record

MD: Hydra community and Anna part of a working group that’s coming up with a template where we could add things to existing work

AH: Could increase/double upload limit, but the more trying to upload at one time, the longer it will take, and more likely for connection drop and need to redo

JV: Key is to want multiple sessions attached to the same record

LB: Baylor U is running their oral history project through contentDM, have ability to look through stuff in OHMS from contentDM

Other template questions?

Everyone is using Chrome as browser

LB has questions such as regarding place

MD: Place will be combined

LB: Location specifications such as place/home

JV: Would prefer maker, title, place, date for metadata ordering

AH: Bulk ordering/show additional fields necessary? Did anyone use edit form?

JV: Wanted to self-select fields

Autocomplete

Not helpful for LB

JV: Got German and then Czech authority name, wanted the LC one

SN: Will use workflow where VIAF is checked first

LB: Field accepted whatever name put in

HK: What to do for a name that doesn’t come up?

Make sure this is in metadata guidelines

Name authorities: VIAF (better search, but poor ranking, sorted by number of holdings) vs FAST (simple search, but better relevance rankings)

LB: Didn’t find VIAF very helpful

JV: Copy and pasted from library catalog, LC is what would need, not sure what it means to choose a different authority, sometimes LC doesn’t have different spellings, but not sure can only use LC authorities

SL: VIAF works best for objects/makers, consults VIAF first, having confirmation is helpful

MD/CL: For now keep VIAF, try lookup, copy and pasting theoretically should match up

LB: Have a list of interviewer authorities, can send over for Andrea to input into NACO

Users like FAST subjects, with USE suggestions

Credit line

Credit line added after last meeting

Larger issue of having a standard “courtesy of CHF”, have that as a tagline and a credit line appending work (additional credit line as 2^nd field)?

JV: Potentially 3 different credit fields for rare books, technically need to differentiate Othmer from Neville

HK: At least meeting, Ron proposed everything is CHF. Thing with credit lines is that it’s not idiot proof if different fields, maybe could have standardized language in the metadata guidelines

CL: Maybe have autocomplete courtesy of CHF?

AH: Credit Line and Additional Credit

MD: Will look into it and circle back

Users confirmed would rather have dropdown, only with a name fill in—“photography by”

“Show additional fields”

Some preferred all fields at once, JV found whole list at once more tedious, LB didn’t notice and went into edit later, consensus on keeping hide button for now

Bulk fields a bit disjointed vs individual form—should probably match up, like moving rights down or rightsholder up

Rights fields will be coming December 2015, using international standard statements, but can add OH-specific statements

LB: Some OH restrictions will have a year

JV: Ideally, make rightsholder grey out if public domain is selected

Digital Collections Policy

MD: Board wants something, policy is beginnings of guidelines for selection

JV: For rare books, non-duplication can’t be a factor because of rare books all being different

MD: Non-duplication in all policies, addressed in grants, but for rare books would use the uniqueness value

Consensus that three guidelines seem a reasonable number to adhere to

MD: Push to access, plan is to have more open access stuff and have a take-down notice, can document due diligence steps

-  Will be changing the scope section as organization is changing, names will also be swapped

-  For scope, do people want to add a date range, or leave it as vague as it is now? Some physical collections have date ranges

All: Preferred vagueness—useful

SL: How to address negotiating only digital deaccession without physical?

MD: Wondering if board wants to know and have a say?

HK/EM: Having board vote on every digital file would be a disaster/unrealistic

EM: Talking with Ron about presenting on accession/deaccession

MD: Have DCC meet to agree

EM: Have to consider whether digital files are an actual “asset” of the institution

TBC, see if other policies have language on this

Excluded items: Websites not currently on Digital Collections agenda

LSF oral histories??