1

Metadata for Asset Management

Peter B. HirtleCo-Director

Cornell Institute for Digital Collections

2

Problem: Imaging projects produce many digital files

4

Problem redux…

How to you locate, manage, and display scanned

images?

5

One possible answer: Put identifying information into the

file header Problems with this approach

Hard to search and retrieve May change over time May not be able to migrate data

6

Second approach

Use an image management system to manage images:

A software application (often a database) used for organizing, managing, and providing access to digital media

7

Image management system Provides tools for searching

(Descriptive metadata)

Provides public and internal links to the images

(Structural metadata)

Provides the control elements needed for short and long-term access

(administrative metadata)

8

Metadata for image management No single accepted standards for each

type of metadata Descriptive metadata

MARC, DC, MOA2, EAD, VRA, Open Archives Initiative

Structural metadata LC RFP’s, MOA2, DOIs

Administrative metadata DIG 35, NISO draft standard, MOA2, in process

preservation standards such as CEDARS

9

Key concept: metadata is seldom fixed

You will be massaging the metadata throughout the life of the project

To conform to emerging standards To adjust to new technical environments To add functionality

Once you start a digital project, you are committed to it for life

10

So where do you get an image management solution? No single off the shelf solution Solutions vary according to:

complexity performance cost

11

What is the “ideal solution”…? Dependent upon your needs:

size of database expected demand for images volatility of the data available technical resources

12

Other elements to consider.... Access to a controlled thesaurus Flexibility in database design The expected life-span of the data If permanent, the potential for

migration Adherence to database standards Adherence to data content standards

13

Three classes of solutions Generic database applications

Desktop Client/server

Specialized image management programs

SGML-based solutions

14

Generic database applications Most common desktop programs

MS Access, Filemaker Pro Client/server applications

Oracle, Informix (including Illustra), 4th Dimension, object-oriented applications

15

Demo Here

16

Advantages to desktop programs Low initial cost for desktop

programs Desktop programs are relatively

easy to program and use Simple data import and export Growing 3rd-party market of add-

ons (especially web tools)

17

Disadvantages

Desktop solutions limited in size(< 10,000?)

Few standardized data structures Web interfaces require

customization High costs of programming

explicit with large applications hidden but real with desktop

18

Specialized image management programs “Desktop” examples:

Canto’s Cumulushttp://www.canto-software.com/

ImageAXS http://www.dascorp.com

Portfolio (formerly Fetch)http://www.extensis.com/products/Portfolio/

Content (shown here)

19

Advantages

Pre-defined data structure Built-in links to images Some are cross-platform Some have built-in links to the web Overall, less programming

expertise required

20

Disadvantages

Fixed data structure Proprietary database structures Limited customization possible Web access is primarily via scripts

21

Larger client/server image management programs

Library software Museum-oriented programs Document management programs Digital library solutions Other programs for newspaper

photos, stock photos, multimedia asset management, etc.

22

Library systems Image-enabled library catalogs

include VTLS CARL OCLC Sitesearch Endeavor’s Voyager and ENCOMPASS RLG has a system in development

All library systems will head in this direction

23

Advantages

Ready links between catalog and digital images

Built on common data structures MARC or Dublin Core

Increased likelihood they will exploit library-specific metadata

Greater possibility for shared resources

24

Disadvantages Poor integration between images

and text No common repository standard No shared standard for utilizing

metadata Administrative hurdles

Do digital imaging and Library Systems talk to each other?

25

SGML and XML-based systems A new approach: using metadata

encoded with SGML or XML Based on document type definitions

(DTD) Examples:

Photographs using EAD: California Heritage project

Text using Ebind (electronic binding DTD) Agora’s complete management system

26

Why consider SGML?

Based on an international standard DTD’s may themselves become

standard Example: MOA2

May be more appropriate for text-oriented description

Links to other SGML or XML-encoded resources are possible

27

Disadvantages to SGML

Little native client support for SGML SGML engines may not be as powerful

as relational databases XML databases are just being developed Native SGML software tends to be

expensive Often it is easier to store data in a

database, and write it out with SGML XML tags for exchange or export

28

Summary

No single imagebase package is likely to meet all your needs

Plan on continuously modifying databases, interfaces, and metadata

Monitor closely the work developing image database standards in the area of greatest interest to you

Avoid if possible the hidden costs of internal development