=============================================
  Workshop on Metadata Interoperability for
     Electronic Records Management
=============================================

November 15, 2001
Archives II, College Park, MD


The following notes were recorded by Jim Whitehead during the course
of a four hour workshop on the topic of metadata interoperability for
electronic records management systems (especially those compliant with
the DoD 5015.2 "Design Criteria Standard for Electronic Records
Management Software Applications" specification).


End-user scenarios:

Metadata standardization only (5015 items in XML):
* Use in procurement -- being able to reference a standard metadata set

* Web site resources -- associate this metadata with web resources for
  improved records management

* Can create metadata helper applications that make the process of
  associating metadata easier 
  - Importance of reducing the effort of associating metadata with
  documents/web resources

* disposition of email records

--------
Accommodating existing metadata in multiple schemas

* Is there a need for mapping equivalent metadata items in multiple
  schemas onto ERM schema?
  - or use as-is, no mapping?

* 5015 already defines the semantics of multiple metadata items
--------
* Interface for accessing ERM services
  - define using an XML-RPC/Web Service/SOAP/WSDL style approach
    - drawback is existing tools don't a priori work with this
    - can leverage emerging Web services infrastructure
  - leverage existing standard such as WebDAV
    - gains the advantage that multiple tools already work with DAV

* Can metadata items be described without the context of a particular
  interface?
  - If an XML representation of 5015 metadata items exists, could be
    embedded in HTML META tags, doc. mgmt. system properties, DAV
    properties
---------
* DoD experience can be leveraged
  - DAML project work
---------
* Importance of keeping addition of documents to the system as simple
  as possible

  - experience that a "one-click" system of identifying an email as a
    record meets this simplicity requirement

  - having the computer infer/compute as much of the metadata as possible

  - much of the metadata specified in 5015 can be defaulted for a
    specific use situation
---------
* What kind of communications should be captured as records?
  - Do the 5015 metadata items capture what is needed to make these records?
---------
* Disposition instructions

  - Two cases: (1) movement in-house from system to system (2)
    movement between organizations

    - in case (1), want to preserve disposition instructions, case (2)
      the disposition instructions will likely be different at the
      destination organization

  - If a 5015 user agent is being used to specify a disposition
    instruction, it needs to have a standard way of sending the
    disp. instr. across the wire
---------
* Dan Schneider provided background on 5015.2
  - Original assumptions in 5015.2  
---------
* Identify what other people are working on, ensure that their efforts
  are leveraged
  
  - Australia has discussed using Dublin Core plus additional metadata
    elements

  - see what comes out of NARA/DoD joint agreement study effort
---------
* Discussion about having records being broadly available to the
  public on the Web

* Discussion about driving factor for inclusion of ERM metadata in the
  first place:
   - retrieval of records via search
   - implies that interchange is not the driving issue, but sharing of
     existing records is
---------
* One area where standardization might be possible is in the metadata registry
---------
* If a mailing list exists for discussion of creating a concrete
  syntax for 5015.2 metadata items, would you be on this list, and
  participate in discussion? 7 people (11 in room at the time)

* Similarly, would you work on a service description for how to
  retrieve these metadata items? 3 people (subset of the original 7)

* Agreement that an XML-based technology will be employed in the
  specification of the concrete syntax

   - Owen Ambur would like to use this concrete syntax for the XML.gov
     site in its records management
---------
* Express schema in a DTD (normative)

  - Also provide XSD and RDFS descriptions of XML schema for
    information (informational)
---------
* Many metadata items will need controlled vocabularies (format, media
  type), and so there is a need to define these values, as well as
  providing a way to extend this set
   - implies there is a need for a registration procedure for new values.


*** End of Workshop ***