Metadata for Digital Resources

Foulonneau, Muriel; Riley, Jenn

doi:10.1533/9781780631257

Cited by 26 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Schemes such as Dublin Core helped us over the last decade to aggregate for example sculptures and paintings by Picasso, by mapping the fields 'Sculptor' and 'Painter' from individual databases to an aggregator such as Europeana using the Dublin Core field 'Creator'. This approach is very useful, but has also opened the door for numerous metadata quality issues (Foulonneau and Riley, 2008). Before starting to apply Linked Data principles on a large scale, the Digital Humanities community needs to be fully aware of these issues and learn lessons from the existing literature in the information science domain.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring entity recognition and disambiguation for cultural heritage collections

Hooland¹,

Wilde²,

Verborgh³

et al. 2013

Digital Scholarship in the Humanities

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Unstructured metadata fields such as 'description' offer tremendous value for users to understand cultural heritage objects. However, this type of narrative information is of little direct use within a machine-readable context due to its unstructured nature. This paper explores the possibilities and limitations of Named-Entity Recognition (NER) and Term Extraction (TE) to mine such unstructured metadata for meaningful concepts. These concepts can be used to leverage otherwise limited searching and browsing operations, but they can also play an important role to foster Digital Humanities research. In order to catalyze experimentation with NER and TE, the paper proposes an evaluation of the performance of three third-party entity extraction services through a comprehensive case study, based on the descriptive fields of the Smithsonian Cooper-Hewitt National Design Museum in New York. In order to cover both NER and TE, we first offer a quantitative analysis of named-entities retrieved by the services in terms of precision and recall compared to a manually annotated gold-standard corpus, then complement this approach with a more qualitative assessment of relevant terms extracted. Based on the outcomes of this double analysis, the conclusions present the added value of entity extraction services, but also indicate the dangers of uncritically using NER and/or TE, and by extension Linked Data principles, within the Digital Humanities. All metadata and tools used within the paper are freely available, making it possible for researchers and practitioners to repeat the methodology. By doing so, the paper offers a significant contribution towards understanding the value of entity recognition and disambiguation for the Digital Humanities.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring entity recognition and disambiguation for cultural heritage collections

Hooland¹,

Wilde²,

Verborgh³

et al. 2013

Digital Scholarship in the Humanities

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Textbooks (e.g. Foulonneau and Riley, 2008;Haynes, 2018;Gartner, 2016;Smiraglia, 2014) enumerate typically a fairly standard set of purposes for metadata, including resource identification and description, information retrieval, information resource management, management of information rights, supporting learning, research and working with information. Haynes (2018) introduces information governance as an additional category.…”

Section: Politics Of Metadata and Paradatamentioning

confidence: 99%

Paradata in Documentation Standards and Recommendations for Digital Archaeological Visualisations

Börjesson¹,

Sköld²,

Huvila³

2020

Digital Culture &Amp; Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Digitalisation of research data and massive efforts to make it findable, accessible, interoperable, and reusable has revealed that in addition to an eventual lack of description of the data itself (metadata), data reuse is often obstructed by the lack of information about the datamaking and interpretation (i.e. paradata). In search of the extent and composition of categories for describing processes, this article reviews a selection of standards and recommendations frequently referred to as useful for documenting archaeological visualisations. It provides insight into 1) how current standards can be employed to document provenance and processing history (i.e. paradata), and 2) what aspects of the processing history can be made transparent using current standards and which aspects are pushed back or hidden. The findings show that processes are often either completely absent or only partially addressed in the standards. However, instead of criticising standards for bias and omissions as if a perfect description of everything would be attainable, the findings point to the need for a comprehensive consideration of the space a standard is operating in (e.g. national heritage administration or international harmonisation of data). When a standard is used in a specific space it makes particular processes, methods, or tools transparent. Given these premises, if the standard helps to document what needs to be documented (e.g. paradata), and if it provides a type of transparency required in a certain space, it is reasonable to deem the standard good enough for that purpose.

show abstract

“…The fact that individuals who create metadata records vary in their level of training and expertise in metadata creation (Foulonneau & Riley, 2008;Greenberg, 2003;Ma, 2006) has led several researchers to posit that the lack of training on the part of metadata creators is detrimental to the quality of metadata records. Godby, Smith, and Childress (2003) and Ryan and Walmsley (2003), for example, argue that many problems found in metadata records could have been avoided by adequate training of metadata creators; Currier and colleagues (2004) contend that the creator of metadata can have serious implications on the usefulness of the resultant records (p. 6).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

An Experimental Study of Metadata Training Effectiveness on Errors in Metadata Records

Yasser

2012

Journal of Library Metadata

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Metadata for Digital Resources

Cited by 26 publications

References 0 publications

Exploring entity recognition and disambiguation for cultural heritage collections

Exploring entity recognition and disambiguation for cultural heritage collections

Paradata in Documentation Standards and Recommendations for Digital Archaeological Visualisations

An Experimental Study of Metadata Training Effectiveness on Errors in Metadata Records

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About