2022-01-20 MWG 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.

• Update on metadata considerations for DAMS

  • Nicole has been reviewing past documentation from DAWG as well as earlier documentation for the ScholarWorks project (e.g., work leading to the metadata dictionary). Also reached out to Elyse Fox for additional information about that process.

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.

  • Melissa will write up revised help text for all creator/advisor/etc. fields and share the revised text during Open Forum. Dave will then update the help text, and then Melissa will distribute the cleanup documentation to ScholarWorks project managers.

  • Dave noted that there could be some complications with co-authored works (authors are separated by pipes) and data entered into new composite fields (separated by caret). Melissa will investigate these issues and revise the documentation accordingly.

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.

  • Dave noted that the Work Forms Task Force has discussed campus variants of some forms, which could address this (see below).

  • Melissa will let DRC Steering know that we’re investigating solutions for this.

Updates from the Work Forms Task Force

Dave

• Seeking feedback on the first round of proposed changes

  • Dave shared the working Google Sheet with the group and talked through various questions that have come up:

    • Manager version of each form

    • Campus variant of some forms (but used sparingly)

    • Some fields to be set up dynamically

    • Currently recommending six forms (but do we need more)

    • Simple rights, license approach

    • Primary & secondary resource types (still in the works)

  • Everyone agreed that the layout of the Google Sheet makes sense and includes a good amount of information without being overwhelming

  • Dave will invite MWG members to the next Work Forms Task Force meeting (February 4) to continue the discussion

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, but that would be challenging at this point given how the administrative set functions.

Current recommendation: For works with co-authors from more than one CSU, just one author should upload the work to ScholarWorks, but they can input institutional affiliation for their co-author in the composite Creator field

Talked again about the utility of a public-facing Note field. Melissa will mention this to DRC Steering at next meeting.