Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 14, No. 674.
Centre for Computing in the Humanities, King's College London
<http://www.princeton.edu/~mccarty/humanist/>
<http://www.kcl.ac.uk/humanities/cch/humanist/>
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 17:46:17 +0000
From: Matt Kirschenbaum <mgk@pop.uky.edu>
Subject: NISO image metadata initiative
Image-based humanities computing projects should have a stake in this;
comments encouraged (I serve on the NISO committee). Matt
--National Information Standards Organization (NISO) NISO Technical Metadata for Digital Still Images Standards Committee http://www.niso.org/commitau.html
NISO Needs Your Input!
Technical metadata, which describes various aspects of image characteristics and the capture process, is increasingly being perceived as an essential component of any digitization initiative. This category of metadata is not only required to support image quality assessment and image enhancement and processing, but also seen crucial for long-term collection management to ensure the longevity of digital collections. Image metadata work to date within the library and cultural heritage community has focused on defining descriptive elements for discovery and identification. The goal of the NISO Technical Metadata for Digital Still Images Standards initiative is to fill this gap by developing a generalized technical metadata standard applicable to all images regardless of their method of creation.
The charge of the NISO's Technical Metadata for Digital Still Images Standards Committee is to review and revise the Data Dictionary for Technical Metadata for Digital Still Images (http://www.niso.org/pdfs/DataDict.pdf), which presents a comprehensive list of technical data elements required to manage digital image collections. We would like to invite comments from our colleagues involved in various aspects of imaging to ensure that the draft dictionary is comprehensive and inclusive, representing various perspectives. The ultimate goal of the standard is to facilitate the development of applications to validate, process, manage, and migrate images of enduring value.
We are particularly interested in getting your feedback on the following issues:
a) Does the draft dictionary include all the data fields that are necessary to achieve the goals of technical metadata? o Document image provenance and history o Ensure that image data will be rendered accurately on output (e.g., displayed screen, printed to paper or film, etc.) o Support the ongoing management of image files (e.g., processing, refreshing, or migration) o Assess the aesthetic value of a given image
b) Is it successful in describing quality attributes such as detail, color, tone, and file size? What else would you recommend to add?
c) Of the elements present, do you have suggestions for changes within the definition? Do definitions need to be expanded? Do you agree it is "required" versus another designation? Should certain elements be repeatable?
d) Put yourself in the position of this data dictionary user. Would you be able to use it? If not, what would you do to make it more usable for you (or your staff)?
e) How does this initiative relate to other similar ones such as DIG or GDI+? Do you know of other related initiatives? DIG35: http://www.digitalimaging.org GDI+: http://www.microsoft.com/hwdev/display/GDIplus_Metadata.htm
f) Do you have any other comments?
Robin Dale (RLG), Co-Chair Oya Y. Rieger (Cornell University Library), Co-Chair
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Feb 15 2001 - 12:58:17 EST