Save the Date: 2022 Digital Repositories Annual Meeting will be held June 1-2 and hosted by SF State.
Digital Archives Update
Nicole
DAWG is finishing up their final report on the self-evaluation toolkit (a questionnaire intended to assess interest in a Samvera-based DAMS). Nine campuses returned the questionnaire.
The final report will be distributed when it’s done, but key points:
56% of respondents said they would use a unified system as their primary DAMS.
44% would just like to submit their metadata. Most of these had just migrated to a new system and are feeling attached to those systems and/or have budgetary concerns.
Still unsure about the costs involved, as that would be dependent on the number of campuses involved. The Chancellor’s Office is supporting ScholarWorks.
Most campuses indicated concerns about the lack of local staffing support, and many were concerned about the lack of defined workflows. Talked about the need to look to other institutions for guidance on workflows (e.g., the UC’s shared DAMS.
Steve Kutay provided a walkthrough of the CSU San Marcos instance of a Samvera-based DAMS, but it includes very few options.
The group will spend the next couple of meetings defining goals for the next year, one of which will probably be looking further into metadata issues.
Need to discuss how our group will address DAWG-focused projects moving forward. There was some interest amongst MWG members during last month’s meeting.
We will bring this to the next DRS Steering Group meeting to discuss expectations.
Work Forms Task Force Update
David
David, Julie, and Hema are serving on this group as well as MWG.
The task force has met twice and has already gathered and documented outside examples in their notes: 2021-11-08 Work Forms meeting. Note that hyperlinked examples in the notes link out to a series of screenshots.
They will discuss the examples in more detail as well as potential changes in their next meeting after the Thanksgiving break.
David demonstrated draft spreadsheets intended to help demonstrate the various fields for each work form. We discussed the potential value of including the help text as well, which generally differs a bit from the metadata dictionary definition.
Also considering more dynamic fields (e.g., Publisher, connecting College and Department, etc.) and additional customization.
The group is also thinking about the order of the fields and look and feel of the forms (e.g., above and below the fold fields).
Demonstrated potential strategies for metadata clean-up of the title field using the title case converter and a formula in Excel. Melissa will finish documenting these for the title field and share that documentation with the ScholarWorks project managers list.
Also demonstrated an Excel formula for flipping the order of author names. We will see how the title clean up goes before deciding on how to proceed with these, as Dave may be able to automate the clean up with some code.
Revisit 2020-2021 Degree Name Recommendation
Melissa
Recommendation from last year: Change to “Enter degree name in capital letters with a period after each letter. For example, M.A. or M.S.”
This recommendation needs to be revisited in view of how all campuses are using this field. Dave will send Melissa a metadata export to facilitate this review. If anyone is interested in talking about these before our next MWG meeting, please get in touch with Melissa.