LIS 7410 - Digital Libraries
Spring 2016 -- Section 01
Homework Assignment 2 (Professional Track) Metadata Standards Study Option

Metadata Standards and Interoperability Study

Select a metadata standard or metadata technology to review. In your paper:

Then select a second metadata standard or technology, compare with (or contrast against) the one you have already studied. The two standards or technologies need to be comparable to some extent (otherwise there would be nothing to compare). In your report, discuss:

Readings for the class session of "Metadata and Markup" are helpful. The typology of data standards (Table 1) in Introduction to Metadata 3.0 helps to understand the typology of standards and to do the comparison/contrast. RDA Vocabularies: Process, Outcome, Use also talks about the typology of metadata and cataloging standards. Digital Libraries: Universal Access to Human Knowledge Report to the President helps to understand the importance of metadata research and use. Understanding metadata introduces various metadata schemes and interoperability issues.

Here are some metadata standards (and/or technologies) for your reference; you are highly encouraged to study metadata standards that interest you the most, which may not be on this list.

Students of previous semesters have studied: Your report might be at least 3 single-spaced pages (excluding illustrations and printouts of sample pages), but no more than 10 pages in total (including illustrations and bibliography). Please submit a Microsoft Word document (.rtf, .doc, or .docx, but not .wpd), a PDF document, or an HTML document. Post your document on your course Website (which you have already created for Assignment 1) by making a link from "Homework 2" to your document. You do not need to email your URL to the instructor again.

Grading guidelines: 

Grading will be based on the QUALITY of following aspects of your study. 

1. Discussion and comparision of two metadata standards/schemes [Minimum requirement]
-- purpose/functions, users/uses of each standard
-- metadata elements of each standard
-- strengths/weaknesses of each standard
-- comparison of the two standards in terms of purpose/strengths/weaknesses
   (Caution: do not pick non-comparable standards)
-- using examples to show your understanding.

2. Discussion of interoperability/crosswalking between the two standards/schemes
-- what elements can be mapped and what elements will be lost
-- using examples to show your understanding

3. Clear and concise writing
-- fluent and not many typos
-- reference/citation (using a standard format)
-- using section headers
-- using tables or lists where appropriate

Grades: 

Category A/A+:  A (93-96), A+ (97-100)
-- All aspects are excellent.
-- Some aspects are addressed better than others, however overall, the report is excellent.

Category B+/A-: B+ (87-89), A- (90-92)
-- All aspects are covered (at least touched), but there are flaw(s) on one or more key aspects (i.e., aspect 1, 2).

Category B-/B: B- (80-82), B (83-86)
-- Not all aspects are covered, but the report has met the minimum requirement. 
-- All aspects are covered, but there are big flaws on one or more key aspects. 

Category C: C- (70-72), C (73-76), C+ (77-79)
-- report does not meet the minimum requirement.

Note: Studying uncommon metadata standards is to be rewarded in grading. 
      Including your own experience with metadata standards is to be rewarded in grading.

Acknowledgement to Xia Lin.

Back to main page

Yejun Wu