Effective date of the policy: |
13 June 2012 |
Last updated: |
17 November 2011 |
Policy owner: |
Library Services, ICTS |
Policy approved by: |
Council |
Reviewed by: | Council |
Enquires: | Executive Director: University Libraries: Ujala Satgoor Executive Director: ICT: Richard Van Huyssteen |
Table of contents
- Purpose
- Definitions
- Applicable to
- Exceptions
- Policy summary
- Policy details
- Policy violations
- Roles and responsibilities
- Appendix A: Indicative metadata schema and domain standards
Purpose
The University must manage metadata and its application to information assets and services to improve the governance, interoperability, retrievability, re-use, storage optimisation, structure and classification of information assets and services.
Definitions
Metadata |
Descriptive or definitive data that is linked to data or to a data collection. |
Schema |
A set of rules for the structure and content of an information artefact, by which that artefact may be constituted as valid at the time that it is parsed. Indicates the permissible access applicable to a record; the level of sensitivity associated with the information contained in a record. (As distinct from “Categorisation”, classification refers specifically to categorisation of its sensitivity, e.g.: Secret, Confidential, Public...) |
Classification | Stewards of institutional data have the primary administrative and management responsibilities for segments of institutional data within their functional area. |
XML | Extensible Markup Language: a machine-readable, open standard language used to describe (“mark up”) information content and its component elements (including metadata). |
Information Architecture | The discipline and frameworks by which information and data are categorised for sourcing, storage and retrieval. For example: Information architecture applies to storage in the domain of database structures, and to retrieval in navigation, filing structures, catalogues etc. |
Content artefact | Any collection of physical or electronic information in any uniform medium, that has meaning and context in its own right, as a single unique entity. A content artefact may be a document, an image, a data collection or a web page, and is normally the result of an operational process. Content artefacts may exist at varying degrees of granularity: from a multimedia collection to a single image. |
Repository | A storage container for content artefacts, physical or electronic. Physical repositories are also often known as “depositories”. |
Taxonomy | A hierarchical structure used to sort information and content into categories and sub-categories. |
Ontology | A schematic representation of “what is known”, defining concepts and their relationship to one another. |
Controlled vocabulary | A list of permissible descriptors that may be associated with or assigned to a content object as metadata. In an application user interface, controlled vocabularies are often used to populate drop-down lists or combo boxes. |
Attribute | A defining characteristic (such as a title, date, owner, or subject) that is assigned to an object to assist in its identification. In a computer environment, a specific property inherent in a database entity or an object. Attributes usually consist of a name and a value, and they are often considered important metadata elements. (International Records Management Trust). A specification that defines a property of an object, element, or file. It may also refer to or set the specific value for a given instance of such. (Wikipedia) |
Open standard | A generally accepted framework that may be applied across many domains, and is accessible in the public domain for common use and re-use. |
(Taxonomy) Facet | A domain-specific taxonomy derived from the values and relationships in a given ontology, providing a domain-relevant point of entry to content. For example, a single ontology of a content collection can deliver taxonomies that are relevant to particular business processes, or taxonomies based on time series, or taxonomies based on information classification, all for the same content collection. |
Applicable to
Storage and archiving of physical and electronic content artefacts and content objects - including but not restricted to:
- Scholarly resources
- Business records and procedural documentation
- Website content
- Research data
- Publications
- Personal information
- Media collections
- Databases and content collections
Publication and dissemination of physical and electronic content artefacts and content objects – including but not restricted to:
- Physical publications (books, journals, articles, theses, dissertations, newspapers)
- Websites and web-based portals
- Mobile browsing sites
Exceptions
- Transactional data
Policy summary
- Metadata and Information Architecture are jointly managed on behalf of UCT by Library Services and ICTS.
- All content objects generated, managed and published by the University of Cape Town and its direct affiliates must be tagged and stored with sufficient metadata.
- Where applicable, metadata should support re-use and interoperability of content between content management systems and content publication media.
- Reduction of duplication: In the interests of efficiency and alignment, metadata standards, schemas and attribute values should be re-used wherever possible.
- Metadata should be registered with a central metadata governance body.
- Standards and accessibility of standards: Open standards for metadata and metadata schemas must be applied wherever possible and practical.
- Metadata delivery: By default and wherever practical, content metadata should be transferred between information systems in Extensible Markup Language (XML) format.
- Publication of metadata: Selection of which metadata values are to be published together with a content object is at the discretion of the content channel owner.
- Metadata quality: Content and collection owners are responsible for ensuring that metadata are compliant with standards, valid, and current.
Policy details
Policy violations
Non-registration of metadata schemas with the UCT central metadata management body has implications for the security of the University’s Intellectual Capital and the reusability of content, as well as implications for compliance with related policies such as the Records Management Policy and the Web Content Management Policy. Inadequate, invalid and inaccurate metadata may result in inappropriate access to content, poor return on investment, and inefficiency. Violations of this policy will be dealt with by the Executive Director: University Libraries and Executive Director: ICT as applicable.
Roles and responsibilities
Roles
Department / designation | Role |
---|---|
Executive Director: University Libraries |
|
Executive Director: ICT |
|
Internal Audit |
|
Information and Communication Technology Services (ICTS) |
|
Library Services |
|
Content owners (of information systems) |
|
Channel owners (of information channels) |
|
Business analysts / Content analysts |
|
Responsibilities
Department / designation | Responsibility |
---|---|
Executive Director: University Libraries |
|
Executive Director: ICT |
|
Internal Audit |
|
Information and Communication Technology Services (ICTS) |
|
Metadata management team |
|
Content owners (of information systems) |
|
Channel owners (of information channels) |
|
Business analysts / Content analysts |
|
Appendix A: Indicative metadata schema and domain standards
Schema / Language | Domain / Purpose |
---|---|
IEEE Learning Object Metadata | Education |
JPEG-2000 | Images |
Machine-Readable Cataloguing (MARC) | Libraries |
Moving Picture Expert Group MPEG-21 and MPEG-7 | Multimedia |
ONIX | Publishing |
Extensible Rights Metadata Language (XrML) | Rights Management |
Dublin Core Metadata Element Set | Web |
Review period: Every five years