publication . Article . Preprint . 2018

Metadata Life Cycles, Use Cases and Hierarchies

Ted Habermann;
Open Access
  • Published: 04 Apr 2018 Journal: Geosciences, volume 8, page 179 (eissn: 2076-3263, Copyright policy)
  • Publisher: MDPI AG
Abstract
The historic view of metadata as “data about data” is expanding to include data about other items that must be created, used, and understood throughout the data and project life cycles. In this context, metadata might better be defined as the structured and standard part of documentation, and the metadata life cycle can be described as the metadata content that is required for documentation in each phase of the project and data life cycles. This incremental approach to metadata creation is similar to the spiral model used in software development. Each phase also has distinct users and specific questions to which they need answers. In many cases, the metadata life cycle involves hierarchies where latter phases have increased numbers of items. The relationships between metadata in different phases can be captured through structure in the metadata standard, or through conventions for identifiers. Metadata creation and management can be streamlined and simplified by re-using metadata across many records. Many of these ideas have been developed to various degrees in several Geoscience disciplines and are being used in metadata for documenting the integrated life cycle of environmental research in the Arctic, including projects, collection sites, and datasets.
Persistent Identifiers

doi: 10.3390/geosciences8050179 , 10.20944/preprints201804.0054.v1

Fields of Science and Technology classification (FOS)
01 natural sciences, 0106 biological sciences, 010601 ecology
Subjects
ACM Computing Classification System: Data_FILES
free text keywords: General Earth and Planetary Sciences, metadata, standards, life-cycle, use-cases, project metadata, metadata hierarchy, observations, measurements, XML, metadata; standards; life-cycle; use-cases; project metadata; metadata hierarchy; observations; measurements; XML, earth_sciences_other, Metadata, Context (language use), Use case, Metadata standard, Software development, business.industry, business, Identifier, XML, computer.internet_protocol, computer, Documentation, Computer science, World Wide Web, Structure (mathematical logic), lcsh:Geology, lcsh:QE1-996.5
Communities
  • DARIAH EU
Download fromView all 5 versions
Open Access
Geosciences
Other literature type . Article . 2018
Providers: Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute; Crossref
Open Access
Geosciences
Article . 2018
Providers: DOAJ-Articles
Open Access
https://doi.org/10.20944/prepr...
Preprint . 2018
Providers: Crossref
Open Access
Geosciences
Article . Preprint
Providers: UnpayWall
30 references, page 1 of 2

Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems (CCSDS), 2012-06, Reference Model for an Open Archival Information System (OAIS). Recommended Practice CCSDS 650.0-M-2, Issue 2, https://public.ccsds.org/pubs/650x0m2.pdf 2018-03-12 (identical to ISO 14721:2012).

Dekkers, M., M. De Keyzer, N. Loutas, and S. Goedertier, 2013, Introduction to metadata management, https://www.slideshare.net/OpenDataSupport/introduction-to-metadata-management (accessed 2 April 2018).

6. Spiral Model, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spiral_model (accessed 17 January 2018).

Documentation Spirals, https://geo-ide.noaa.gov/wiki/index.php?title=Documentation_Spirals (accessed 17 January 2018).

Creating Good Documentation, https://geo-ide.noaa.gov/wiki/index.php?title=Creating_Good_Documentation (accessed 17 January 2018).

NOAA Satellite Products and Services Review Board, http://projects.osd.noaa.gov/SPSRB/index.htm (accessed 17 January 2018).

10. Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Circular A-16 Revised, https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Circular-016.pdf (accessed 17 January 2018).

11. FGDC Content Standard for Geospatial Metadata, https://www.fgdc.gov/metadata/csdgm-standard (accessed 17 January 2018).

12. Habermann, T., 2011, Presentation at GeoData Forum, https://tw.rpi.edu/web/Workshop/Community/GeoData2011/MetadataLifeCycle (accessed 17 January 2018).

13. ISO 19115-1:2014, Geographic information -- Metadata -- Part 1: Fundamentals, https://www.iso.org/standard/53798.html (accessed 17 January 2018).

14. GCMD, A Short History of the Directory Interchange Format (DIF), https://gcmd.gsfc.nasa.gov/add/difguide/whatisadif.html (accessed 17 January 2018).

15. NASA ECHO Project (2010), ECHO Data Partner's Guide, https://cdn.earthdata.nasa.gov/conduit/upload/1475/ECHO_Data_Partner_User_Guide_0.pdf (accessed 15 January 2018).

16. DataCite Metadata Working Group. (2017). DataCite Metadata Schema Documentation for the Publication and Citation of Research Data. Version 4.1. DataCite e.V., http://doi.org/10.5438/0014 (accessed 31 January 2018).

17. Gray et al. (2015), Dataset Descriptions: HCLS Community Profile, https://www.w3.org/TR/hcls-dataset/#datasetdescriptionlevels (accessed 15 January 2018).

18. Schwardmann, U., 2016, PID Information Types Will Leverage Interoperability Between PID Systems, https://figshare.com/articles/PID_Information_Types_will_leverage_Interoperability_between_PID_systems/4224314 (accessed 1 February 2018).

30 references, page 1 of 2
2 research outcomes, page 1 of 1
Abstract
The historic view of metadata as “data about data” is expanding to include data about other items that must be created, used, and understood throughout the data and project life cycles. In this context, metadata might better be defined as the structured and standard part of documentation, and the metadata life cycle can be described as the metadata content that is required for documentation in each phase of the project and data life cycles. This incremental approach to metadata creation is similar to the spiral model used in software development. Each phase also has distinct users and specific questions to which they need answers. In many cases, the metadata life cycle involves hierarchies where latter phases have increased numbers of items. The relationships between metadata in different phases can be captured through structure in the metadata standard, or through conventions for identifiers. Metadata creation and management can be streamlined and simplified by re-using metadata across many records. Many of these ideas have been developed to various degrees in several Geoscience disciplines and are being used in metadata for documenting the integrated life cycle of environmental research in the Arctic, including projects, collection sites, and datasets.
Persistent Identifiers

doi: 10.3390/geosciences8050179 , 10.20944/preprints201804.0054.v1

Fields of Science and Technology classification (FOS)
01 natural sciences, 0106 biological sciences, 010601 ecology
Subjects
ACM Computing Classification System: Data_FILES
free text keywords: General Earth and Planetary Sciences, metadata, standards, life-cycle, use-cases, project metadata, metadata hierarchy, observations, measurements, XML, metadata; standards; life-cycle; use-cases; project metadata; metadata hierarchy; observations; measurements; XML, earth_sciences_other, Metadata, Context (language use), Use case, Metadata standard, Software development, business.industry, business, Identifier, XML, computer.internet_protocol, computer, Documentation, Computer science, World Wide Web, Structure (mathematical logic), lcsh:Geology, lcsh:QE1-996.5
Communities
  • DARIAH EU
Download fromView all 5 versions
Open Access
Geosciences
Other literature type . Article . 2018
Providers: Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute; Crossref
Open Access
Geosciences
Article . 2018
Providers: DOAJ-Articles
Open Access
https://doi.org/10.20944/prepr...
Preprint . 2018
Providers: Crossref
Open Access
Geosciences
Article . Preprint
Providers: UnpayWall
30 references, page 1 of 2

Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems (CCSDS), 2012-06, Reference Model for an Open Archival Information System (OAIS). Recommended Practice CCSDS 650.0-M-2, Issue 2, https://public.ccsds.org/pubs/650x0m2.pdf 2018-03-12 (identical to ISO 14721:2012).

Dekkers, M., M. De Keyzer, N. Loutas, and S. Goedertier, 2013, Introduction to metadata management, https://www.slideshare.net/OpenDataSupport/introduction-to-metadata-management (accessed 2 April 2018).

6. Spiral Model, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spiral_model (accessed 17 January 2018).

Documentation Spirals, https://geo-ide.noaa.gov/wiki/index.php?title=Documentation_Spirals (accessed 17 January 2018).

Creating Good Documentation, https://geo-ide.noaa.gov/wiki/index.php?title=Creating_Good_Documentation (accessed 17 January 2018).

NOAA Satellite Products and Services Review Board, http://projects.osd.noaa.gov/SPSRB/index.htm (accessed 17 January 2018).

10. Office of Management and Budget (OMB), Circular A-16 Revised, https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Circular-016.pdf (accessed 17 January 2018).

11. FGDC Content Standard for Geospatial Metadata, https://www.fgdc.gov/metadata/csdgm-standard (accessed 17 January 2018).

12. Habermann, T., 2011, Presentation at GeoData Forum, https://tw.rpi.edu/web/Workshop/Community/GeoData2011/MetadataLifeCycle (accessed 17 January 2018).

13. ISO 19115-1:2014, Geographic information -- Metadata -- Part 1: Fundamentals, https://www.iso.org/standard/53798.html (accessed 17 January 2018).

14. GCMD, A Short History of the Directory Interchange Format (DIF), https://gcmd.gsfc.nasa.gov/add/difguide/whatisadif.html (accessed 17 January 2018).

15. NASA ECHO Project (2010), ECHO Data Partner's Guide, https://cdn.earthdata.nasa.gov/conduit/upload/1475/ECHO_Data_Partner_User_Guide_0.pdf (accessed 15 January 2018).

16. DataCite Metadata Working Group. (2017). DataCite Metadata Schema Documentation for the Publication and Citation of Research Data. Version 4.1. DataCite e.V., http://doi.org/10.5438/0014 (accessed 31 January 2018).

17. Gray et al. (2015), Dataset Descriptions: HCLS Community Profile, https://www.w3.org/TR/hcls-dataset/#datasetdescriptionlevels (accessed 15 January 2018).

18. Schwardmann, U., 2016, PID Information Types Will Leverage Interoperability Between PID Systems, https://figshare.com/articles/PID_Information_Types_will_leverage_Interoperability_between_PID_systems/4224314 (accessed 1 February 2018).

30 references, page 1 of 2
2 research outcomes, page 1 of 1
graphPowered by OpenAIRE Research Graph
Any information missing or wrong?Report an Issue