2018 was quite a year: Metadata 2020 was on the agenda at 17 conferences, workshops and meetings; community groups formed into six cross-stakeholder projects; the projects got to worked to better understand metadata challenges; and we held two end-of-year-one in-person workshops with 50 people in New York and London to share things out and discuss the 2019 agenda. Over 200 people participated in some way, whether through signing up for the mailing list, chatting on Slack, or attending online meetings and webinars.
We are seeking a part-time Community Engagement Lead to support the growing Metadata 2020 Community. As a project management and communications specialist, you will be the central contact for all community groups, projects, and sub-groups; and be the main point of contact for Metadata 2020 overall. This position is essential to the effective day-to-day running of Metadata 2020 and requires a self-starting individual with initiative and a willingness to step into a variety of tasks where needed.
There are many new—and very welcome—Metadata 2020 participants. Some of you may have participated since the beginning. In either case, you might find it helpful to have a little more information about who does what in the initiative, and a bit about the roles we have adopted… Clare Dean: Upholder @ClareEDean; firstname.lastname@example.org Things to know about me I’m the one who sends you meeting invitations and requests and who frantically types/mistypes meeting notes on calls.
Pretty much everyone directly involved with or affected by scholarly metadata (that’s all of us by the way) is as baffled by and annoyed with its current challenges as we are hopeful and adamant about its rightful place in improving research communications. So it’s rather daunting to be tasked with delivering to the community Shared Best Practice and Principles, the Metadata 2020 project group of which I am co-chair, along with Howard Ratner of CHORUS.
Action and Overlaps Each project has now had at least three meetings, and activity for each is ramping up. As it does so, several short term subgroups have emerged, and cross-project collaborations have formed. Survey P.1 ‘Researcher Communications’ and P.3 ‘Defining the Terms We Use About Metadata’ have both identified a need for a survey for researchers about their uses and needs of metadata. They will be forming a subgroup including representatives from each project to write the survey before consulting with the ‘Researchers’ Community Group to check for accuracy and relevance.
The Metadata 2020 Project Thread Metadata 2020 has recently initiated six projects that form a unified framework supporting the metadata improvement goals and aspirations of the project: Researcher Communication - Exploring ways to align efforts between communities that aim to increase the impact and consistency of communication with researchers about metadata. Metadata Recommendation and Evaluation Mappings - To converge communities and publishers towards a shared set of recommended metadata concepts with related mappings between those recommended concepts and elements in important dialects.
Summary Through discussions and additional work, Metadata 2020 project participants have now created 4-6 month project plans for intended execution between May and October 2018, and in some cases have already started to advance the work. Participants are also benefiting from a useful exchange of ideas in meetings. Thanks to everyone giving up their time and contributing their expertise to this important work. 1. Researcher Communications Led by: Carly Strasser
Summary The first meetings for the Metadata 2020 projects have now taken place. They focused on the breadth and scope of each project, discussing the crossovers with other projects, and potential overlaps and need for synchronization with other metadata-related initiatives in scholarly communications. 1. Researcher Communications Chaired by: Carly Strasser This group discussed the significance of communicating with researchers to all scholarly communications community groups - Publishers, Librarians, Data Publishers and Repositories, Service Providers, and Funders.
Summary The following article discusses and examines Hindawi’s approach to metadata, and the opportunities and challenges we and other publishers face. Published content By the time an article is published in final format, it consists of a typeset PDF and a HTML display both based on XML and an e-pub. All our content is open access and anyone is able to download the PDF, the XML and/or e-pub. Hindawi adheres to JATS DTD and has done so since 2012, and we retrospectively updated XML of all our published content since 2008.
The KBART format (Knowledge Bases and Related Tools) was developed by a NISO Working Group as a way to standardize the title level information content providers send to discovery services to facilitate customer access. This standard, developed by library, content provider, and discovery service industry stakeholders, creates efficiencies across the supply chain, and creating KBART files for title based projects has been an exceptionally helpful investment for Oxford University Press.