Welcome to the Digital Library Federation (DLF) Assessment Interest Group (AIG) Metadata Working Group, also known as the DLF Metadata Assessment Working Group.
The DLF Metadata Assessment Working Group strives to collaboratively build guidelines, best practices, tools, and workflows around the evaluation and assessment of metadata used by and for digital libraries and repositories. We fulfill this mission by supporting discussions of metadata assessment and quality control, sharing metadata assessment approaches, and fostering a community of dedicated metadata assessment professionals.
The DLF Metadata Assessment Working Group creates high-level outputs that metadata workers from all walks of life can employ for their various metadata assessment needs.
As such, our efforts focus on how to measure, evaluate, and assess metadata as it exists in various digital library systems.
We hope that this resource offers a way for fellow metadata professionals to perform their own assessment of metadata practices; understand the results; and–ultimately–decide on a path that both enhances metadata quality and leads to a better understanding of one’s collections.
The DLF Metadata Assessment Working Group consists of the following sub-groups:
- Collaboration (with other AIG working groups).
- Environmental Scan.
- Metadata Quality Benchmarks.
Current Project Focus
The 2019 DLF Metadata Assessment Working Group’s efforts focused on:
- Updating the Metadata Assessment Zotero Library.
- Developing a survey about metadata assessment and metadata quality practices.
- Creating a preliminary metadata analysis tools repository.
- Updating the DLF Metadata Assessment Working Group’s website.
See the DLF Metadata Assessment Working Group’s wiki page for prior years’ goals and deliverables.
This resource provides metadata professionals with a plain language, high-level resource for assessing descriptive metadata in digital collections.
Due to the wide range of digital collections, users, and institutions, this tool does not offer prescriptive recommendations for metadata.
As our research efforts continue, we hope to expand our efforts to include related topics like:
- Other kinds of metadata, such as structural, administrative, and technical metadata.
- Assessment of the utility and importance of metadata.
- The qualitative state of metadata currently used.
- Metadata beyond the digital repository.
As a member of the DLF community, we abide by the DLF Code of Conduct.