2022-01-20 Meeting notes

Announcements/Quick Updates

All

• The Digital Repositories Meeting Planning Committee met last week. A call for submissions is in the works. Reminder that the meeting will be held June 1 and 2.

• Dave provided an update on plans for a DAMS at the January 7 Open Forum. More details to come.

Field of the Month

Melissa

• Provided a demo of the batch metadata editing process for the Title field at the January 7 Open Forum and made some minor updates to the Confluence documentation following that demo (e.g., added a couple of screenshots and revised the instructions for Find & Replace within Excel).

• Sent a poll to ScholarWorks project managers to schedule a coworking meeting for metadata cleanup; will schedule an initial meeting at the end of the day on Friday, January 21.

• Discuss the draft documentation for Creator, Advisor, and Committee Member fields. Confirm the previously discussed changes to the Creator field help text. Plan to share all of this information during the February Open Forum.

Recommendation for Degree Name Field

Melissa, Ryan, Pam, & Julie

• Recap our recommendation from the December 16 MWG meeting, based on analysis of existing metadata.

  • Carry forward the MWG’s recommendation for Degree Name from last year to change the help text to “Enter degree name in capital letters with a period after each letter.  For example, M.A. or M.S.”

  • Create a new, free-text field for Program Name, likely for the ETD work form only

    • Shared example of Digital Commons record with separate Degree Name and Program Name fields: https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/etd/8028/

  • Let project managers know that if they would prefer a controlled vocabulary list for program names, the department field can be adapted for this purpose, and it is possible to only apply the change to the ETD work form. Dave has already made this change for SF State.

Updates from the Work Forms Task Force

Dave

Multi-author Works with Multiple Affiliations

Hema and Melissa

Question from Hema’s campus:

• In the case of multi-institutional authorship scenarios: Should both campuses deposit the item redundantly and separately? Should one campus (e.g., of the corresponding author) be the primary depositor, then cross-reference to the other campus in the author metadata? Is there a way to associate a deposit record with multiple campus administrative sets?

We’ve discussed this in the past and the potential benefits of being able to associate a single work with more than one administrative set.