130 likes | 143 Views
Research-Based Metadata Requirements for a BLS Reports Archive. Scott Berridge John Bosley Daniel W. Gillman US Bureau of Labor Statistics. Current Historical Archive Situation. Publications date to 1886 For many publications – 1 copy exists Many publications irreplaceable
E N D
Research-Based Metadata Requirements for a BLS Reports Archive Scott Berridge John Bosley Daniel W. Gillman US Bureau of Labor Statistics
Current HistoricalArchive Situation • Publications date to 1886 • For many publications – 1 copy exists • Many publications irreplaceable – no disaster recovery
Relevance to BLS • Unique historical archives • 120 years of publications • 10 years systematically available online • User expectations are rising • Standards are evolving • Mandates are under discussion
Meeting Emerging Standards • File Format • Adobe Acrobat PDF/A • Labeling • Adobe’s Extensible Metadata Platform (XMP) • Metadata Schema • Data Documentation Initiative (DDI)
Archive on Bureau’s Website • www.bls.gov • Servers inside and outside firewall • Public domain • Accessible thru BLS Home Page
Choosing Metadata Elements • Schema Choice • DDI Subset • Schema Useful? • Dissemination and Preservation • Perform user studies – 2 phases • Phase 1 -- Initial studies (3) • What users want / need • Relatively open-ended, exploratory • Phase 2 -- Focused studies (2) • Expose users to DDI subset • Obtain feedback
Reasons for DDI • Want success @ BLS • Minimize capture burden • Unknowable metadata • Old documents (back to 1886) • DDI allows level of granularity • Conformance • Easy with DDI
Potential Problem • Dissemination and Preservation? • Is DDI suitable for preservation? • Preservation elements • Looking at other standards
User Studies--Overview • Adopt techniques of • focus groups • group interviews • Recruited members of general public • Screened for familiarity w/ Gov’t Stats • Five groups, 2-6 members per group • 3 groups -- initial, exploratory • 2 groups – review DDI elements
User Studies Results • Initial exploratory groups (3) • Descriptors consistently identified • title, date, and geographic coverage • Descriptors essential and informative • Members – generalize in abstract - hard • Difficulty imagining other descriptors • If personal need does not exist a priori, then • “What can I do with this information?” • “How is it useful to me?”
User Studies Results • DDI-focused groups (2) • Descriptors verified • Keywords also very important • However, very large sets of keywords • Counterproductive or Confusing • “TMI” – information overload
User Studies Results • DDI-focused groups (2) • Some want title or subtitle to answer • “How is this report useful to me?” • “How can I put it to use?” • Example – Title includes “A guide” • More useful than the formal title/name • Criterion for acquiring a document • Action, use of information • Not subject matter
Conclusion • Questions • Contact • Scott Berridge • Berridge.Scott@BLS.Gov • John Bosley • Bosley.John@BLS.Gov • Dan Gillman • Gillman.Daniel@BLS.Gov