Today we continue to share outputs from the Metadata 2020 projects. We are excited to announce the publication of a peer-reviewed academic literature review which has been published in RIO Journal. The review presents insights gained from comparing a range of articles that address the challenges and opportunities present in scholarly communications metadata. Gregg WJ, Erdmann C, Paglione LAD, Schneider J, Dean C (2019) A literature review of scholarly communications metadata.
The stage is set. Items are ready to be described by metadata, or have some metadata to be augmented or used. But who are the cast of players that interact with metadata to ensure its usefulness? Our project, Incentives for Improving Metadata Quality, led by Fiona Counsell, has been focused on highlighting the applications and value of metadata for all parts of the community. In order to tell these stories, the project team considered the key metadata players and how to best describe them.
Today we continue our communication of Metadata 2020 outputs as outlined in an earlier post. Since 2018, our work has been primarily divided into six project groups; as co-chairs of the Researcher Communications project, we are happy to share an update on our work. This project group is been charged with increasing our understanding of the attitudes and values that individuals have about metadata in scholarly outputs in order to help inform how we talk about metadata to this audience.
Many of you are probably aware that Metadata 2020 has a project group working on Best Practices and Principles. After many months of collaboration, we are happy to share a draft of the Principles for community input. These aspirational Metadata 2020 Principles were designed to encompass the needs of our entire community while ensuring thoughtful, purposeful, and reusable metadata resources. They advocate for all of us to be good metadata citizens.
Metadata 2020 was established in 2017 with a bold mission to facilitate the collaboration of all involved in scholarly communications to consistently improve metadata to enhance discoverability, encourage new services, and create efficiencies, with the ultimate goal of accelerating scholarly research. As our name implies, we also scheduled a 2020 deadline for our work. As we consider our progress at the project midpoint, we have a full journey to be proud of.
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.