Table of Contents
We have released a report on metadata creation practices based on a survey of RLG partner institutions. 134 responses from 67 institutions were received.
Ayers, Leighann, Beth Picknally Camden, Lisa German, Peggy Johnson, Caroline Miller and Karen Smith-Yoshimura. 2009. What We’ve Learned from the RLG Partners Metadata Creation Workflows Survey. Published online at: https://www.oclc.org/programs/publications/reports/2009-04.pdf [pdf].
It shows the variety of tools and techniques in use. Here are a couple of passages …
The working group had hoped that the survey would point to tools and resources for streamlining metadata workflows that might be shared within the RLG Partnership and that could be adapted locally. However, survey responses suggest that the tools being used are very localized, and no one tool kit is being used. Most tools mentioned were generic, i.e., standard software and programming (Java, Perl, XSL-based custom code) or a combination of these that has been locally customized for metadata creation and non-MARC enrichment….
… When asked about the types of materials to which metadata creation tools are applied, 78 respondents identified various material types. By far the most common material type identified was archival materials/finding aids–selected by 73% of the 78 respondents to this question. Electronic texts were next (50%), followed by visual (2-D) materials (45%).[What we’ve learned from the RLG Partners metadata creation workflows survey]