Phase 2


The work of highlighting the insights from the distinct stakeholder groups (librarians, researchers, publishers, etc.) illuminated the systemic nature of addressing the metadata problems. Our work would not be accomplished by single stakeholder groups making incremental changes. Rather, the system itself of how we as an integrated community engage with, value and benefit from metadata would need to be improved to realize lasting improvement.

Recognizing this needs, the Metadata 20/20 effort shifted to project-based work that included members of each of the stakeholder groups to address systemic challenges. The resulting six projects coalesced round a specific purpose statement to identify, research, and make recommendations to address the systemic challenge.

Each of these groups met over the course of a year to discuss and collaborate to further their purposes. The work of these projects led to the several output that are described in the next phase.

The project purpose statements

1. Researcher Communications

Exploring ways to align efforts between communities that aim to increase the impact and consistency of communication with researchers about metadata.

2. Metadata Recommendations and Element 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.

3. Defining the Terms We Use About Metadata

In order to communicate effectively about anything, a common language must be acknowledged, tacitly or purposefully. In the metadata space, there is not agreement on what words like ‘property’, ‘term’, ‘concept’, ‘schema’, or ‘title’ refer to. This project will develop a glossary of words associated with metadata, both for core concepts and disciplinary areas.

4. Incentives for Improving Metadata Quality

To highlight downstream applications and value of metadata for all parts of the community, telling real stories as evidence of how better metadata will meet their goals.

5. Shared Best Practice and Principles

To build a set of high level best practices for using metadata across the scholarly communication cycle, in order to facilitate interoperability and easier exchange of information and data across the stakeholders in the process.

6. Metadata Evaluation and Guidance

To identify and compare existing metadata evaluation tools and mechanisms for connecting the results of those evaluations to clear, cross-community guidance.