Having been out of town last week and missing class, I was a bit apprehensive to tackle the readings on metadata along with the two Powerpoint decks. Metadata is a major component to the work of a majority of information science professions and I was hoping to get a good handle on the elusive practice of collecting “data on data”. Chowdhury was able to lay a solid foundation and he introduced the basic concepts in his chapter on metadata. The Gilliland text was helpful as it expanded on the definitions and practices of metadata collection and being a visual person I benefited greatly from the provided examples in the tables. Visualizing the different roles or components of the functions of metadata helped me understand how this information is collected and shared in various LIS and public environments. I began to see the struggle for a format that could be rigid enough to capture and codify information in a manner that best serves the object but flexible enough to anticipate new practices, and more importantly, to be able to be shared among a variety of users with vastly different expectations and interest in the information.
Then I got to the Dublin Core User Guide and became completely lost. The visuals of the RDF graphs with URIs springing forward like copulating bunnies were no help in illustrating the concept of Linked Data. The more I poured over the RDF terms the more I was bogged down in not only the “data of the data”, but the data of the data of the data. I am hoping that today’s class will be able to provide some concrete examples of MARC and EAD records that we can dissect and discuss. Bring on the visuals!