| Title | [[[General Questions]]] |
| Publication Type | Miscellaneous |
| Year of Publication | Submitted |
| Notes | '\n\nRiley’s Viz\n\n\nAre we trying to add another acronym/standard to something like Riley’s visualization?\n\n\nHow have the number, categorization of metadata standards (in the cultural heritage arena) changed since Riley’s visualization was produced in 2009-2010?\n\n\n\n\nTEI\n\n\nAre we, like the TEI, aiming to develop “Guidelines which specify encoding methods for machine-readable texts?”\n\n\n\n\nA batesonian angle on meta data? The idea of scale seems at play, something about a different order of analysis… context. Like deutero-learning somehow? Reflexivity?\n\n\nPedagogical connections to meta-data? Meta-learning? Trajectory of “critical” thinking (in higher ed) starting post WWII as response to communism (critiquing the other but leaving our own ideologies unexamined?) and then more reflexive around the Vietnam War era?\n\n\nAre we (do we want to be) developing a standard (Bowker, sorting things out, light structure, categorization, boundary objects, etc.)? Are these standards a bit like CMAQ (algorithm, certainly standardized).\n\n\ni.e.: AES standards of particular interest to those working with oral history metadata are:AES57-2011: AES standard for audio metadata – Audio object structures for preservation and restoration Printing Date: 2011-09-21 Abstract: This standard provides a vocabulary to be used in describing structural and administrative metadata for digital and analog audio formats for the purpose of enabling audio preservation activities on those objects. Some implementations also refer to this metadata as technical metadata. The characteristics of the audio objects captured by this standard may be of use to audio communities beyond the audio preservation community.[9]\n\n\n\n\nWhat are some of the ways proprietary software causes problems, reasons for going open-source? “However, as many of the most frequently used word processing programs are proprietary, the portability of embedded metadata in the files they create is by no means guaranteed, and its long-term usefulness may be doubtful” (Maze)\n\n\nMETS\n\n\nCheck out minutes from editorial board meeting?\n\n\nDo we need an editorial board (like METS does)? Is that a primary function of the members of our WG?\n\n\nWhat is a data model exactly? i.e. the METS 2.0 data model.\n\n\nSee open annotation collaboration webpage on data model as well.\n\n\nWhat are METS profiles?\n\n\n\n\n - brcostelloekuehn' |