CAUL survey on the use of metadata in university libraries and campuses : November 2001

Summary :

  • There were 30 respondents, of which 17 applied metadata consistently or selectively, 4 intended to start, 2 were investigating, and 7 not using.
  • Of those using or planning to use metadata, 9 used some form of Dublin Core, another 5 used a combination of locally created and Dublin Core elements, 1 used abbreviated IMS, another used a combination of IMS and local tags, and another 5 had devised local schemes.

Most common reasons for applying metadata were

  • Belief in improvement of retrieval, particularly local site search engines
  • Site management of webpages
  • Raise profile of library/institution
  • Future expectations of metadata use and staff knowledge

Most common reasons for not applying metadata were:

  • Not library priority
  • Lack library staff and resources
  • No firm metadata standard
  • Limited use of metadata by search engines

Q1.
Are you attaching metadata to library webpages? / Q2. Which metadata standards are you using and why? / Q3.
How comprehensively do you apply metadata?
Which fields do you add?* / Q4.
What do you consider are the advantages? / Q5.
Who adds the metadata to the webpages? / Q6.
If Q1 = no, what are your reasons for not applying metadata? / Q7.
If Q1 = no, does your University attach metadata? If so, which standard?
Australian Catholic University / No / Not priority, although this will change as University moves to Metadata standard : probably AGLS / University has approved metadata set.
Australian National University / Yes, most pages / Dublin Core. Anticipate future search engines will rely on metadata : investing in future / Area (=Library)
Content status
(=Official or unofficial)
Title
Title. Alternative
Creator Corporate
Creator Personal
Creator Email
Subject
Description
Publisher
Publ.Authoriser
Date modified
Date Valid to
Type
Identifier
Contributor
Rights /
  • Site management.
  • Future search engine use.
/ Web coordinator and assistant
Bond University / Yes. / Dublin Core : considered a ‘de facto’ standard / Title
Language
Creator Personal
Creatr Corporate
Subject
Description
Publisher
Date /
  • Improved retrieval
  • Higher profile for Library and University
/ Electronic Services Librarian or webpage authors / na / na
Curtin University / Yes / Currently just some Dublin Core fields and some internally created fields (for search engines); now looking at a wider range of fields from a mix of DC, and Curtin. More info at:
metadata.curtin.edu.au / DC.Title
DC.Creator
DC.Subject
DC.Description
DC.Identifier
DC.Date
Keyword
Description / Better retrieval rate / LISWeb
Co-ordinator – in future the creator of the information will provide the metadata / na / na
Deakin University / University is drafting guidelines for use on all pages / Abbreviated form of IMS / Title
Content-type
Author
Publisher
Keywords
Date
Terminator
Expires
Content-Language
Location
Scheme / Firm belief in value to maintenance and retrieval of webpages / Webpage writers / na / na
Edith Cowan University / Yes, all pages / na / Name
Author
Country
Coverage
Title
Keyword / not sure / Web administrator / na / na
Flinders University / No / na / na / na / na / Lack of widespread support from search engines to limit searches by metadata / No
Griffith University / Yes, but not pages generated from a database / Subset of IMS supplemented by local tags: standard set by University.
Also Dublin Core on some project pages as required by project e.g. Australian Digital Theses / Title
Description
Keywords
Version
Author
Author Position
Guide
Guide Position
Guide element
Custodian
CustodianPositin
VersionDate
ReviewDate
ExpirationDate
RightsUse
Prerequisites
ResourceType /
  • Improve retrieval. particularly by University’s search engine
  • Site management
/ Guides, who ‘publish’ the pages and create HTML from writers’ submissions / na / na
La Trobe University / Not comprehensively – but plan to / Dublin Core – because of simplicity and wide use / Only added to some pages and where added only a small subset of DC tags:
Author
Coder
Subject
Type
Date /
  • Use by search engine ‘within’ the library
  • Aid in managing the web site
/ Author / Staff resources – but is now being identified as a priority / No
Macquarie University / Only if page contains ‘unique institutional information’ / In house, informal. Currently designing scheme. / na / Enhance retrieval / Webpage writers / Not priority previously. No agreed standard. / Selectively. University front page and some dept. pages
Northern Territory University / No / na / na / na / na / Lack of staff time to investigate and implement / Basic template, no particular metadata standard
Queensland University of Technology / No, but intend to implement University standard / QUT standard to be used / na / na / na / QUT recently introduced standard, web page owners require training / Dublin Core for internal search engine ; simpler generic scheme for external search engines
Southern Cross University / Currently drafting policy / Basic Dublin Core considered appropriate, with meta keyword and description, and some institution specific data / na / Current preference for style sheets, templates.
Human resources unavailable / Webpage writers / Background issue – no t priority
Inhouse library expertise is developed / Some applied.
Internal search engine does not readily recognise metadata
Swinburne University of Technology / Not generally. / na / Corporate name added by default. Encouraging addition of title by authors. / na / Webpage writers / Minimal.
Not priority previously. No agreed standard. / Selectively to top level pages
University of Ballarat / Yes, all pages / Dublin Core (reduced set of 12)
Best suited needs and contained relevant fields / Title
date
Creator
Publisher
Subject
Description
Type
Format
Language
Contributor
Identifier
Source /
  • retrieval by internal and external meta search engines
  • improve recall and precision of searches
  • assist library staff in searching and helping users
/ Webpage creators / publishers / na / na
University of Canberra / To all new ones, and to existing ones as they are updated. / Dublin Core. Anticipate future search engines will rely on metadata : investing in future.
See Dublin Core as the standard of the future. / All pages: the list of fields follows.
  • Document classification
  • Description
  • Keywords
  • Author
  • Title
  • Publisher
  • Division
  • School/Section
  • Expiry date
  • Last modified date
/
  • Site management.
  • Future search engine use
  • Improving access to electronic material, and accuracy of search results
/ Content owners of web pages
University of Canterbury / Yes, all pages / Dublin Core : most widely accepted / Creator
Publisher
Description
Identifier
DateCreated
DateModified
DateValidTo / assist retrieval in internal search engine
promote library on external engines
site management / Webpage writers, otherwise web editors / na / Some Uni depts using keywords and descriptions
University of Melbourne / No, although some authors add at own discretion – intend to start / Dublin Core, with some local specific fields / DC Title
DC Creator (Author)
DC subject
DC Publisher
(Authoris. officer)
DC Contributor
DC Date Publish
DC Date last maintained
DC Expiry date
DC Rights / Improved retrieval / na / Investigating for implementing in 2002 / see Q2
University of New England / No. Some authors add at own discretion.
Currently investigating / na / na / na / Webpage writers / Not priority previously. No agreed standard. / Selectively.
Dublin Core.
University of New South Wales / Selectively, top-level pages and those with distinctive content / Dublin Core qualified.
Internationally recognised standard with extensibility / Title
AlternativeTitle
CreatorPersonal
CreatorOrganisat
CreatorEmail
Subject
Description
Date created
Date modified
Format
Identifier
Rights
Publisher
Language
Type
Relation
Source
Coverage
Contributor /
  • Retrieval by UNSW internal search engine
  • Good training for other metadata projects
/ Webpage creators / na / na
University of Newcastle / Yes, all pages / Basic HTML tags / Author
Description
Keywords /
  • Better positioning in search engine results, particularly internal search engine
/ Webpage writers, checked by webpage editor / na / na
University of Queensland / Yes / Locally defined.
Some pages also have Dublin Core
qualified and unqualified. Good for simplified searching. Can be difficult to use. / Author
Custodian
Date last modified /
  • Site management
  • Improving searching provision
/ Webpage writers / University currently re- examining local search engine and metadata support
University of Southern Queensland / Selectively, hope to extend to all library pages in future / Locally created standard based on Dublin Core
: relevant to USQ / Title
Author
Contributor
Publisher
Custodian
Date of release
Date of review
Date of expiry
Keywords
Description
Type
Format
Location
USQ Identifier
Version
Source
Relationship
Language
Rights /
  • Improve retrieval particularly in-house
  • Long term benefit
/ Electronic Services Librarian and webmaster / na / na
University of Sydney / Yes, most pages / Dublin Core
: best suited needs, have followed its development / Mandatory are:
Title
Creator
OrganisatCreator
Subject
Description
Date
rest are optional /
  • Enhance retrieval
  • Help plan for digital archives
  • Internal site management
  • make people think about their pages
/ Webpage writers / na / na
University of Technology, Sydney / No / na / na /
  • enhance access to key resources
  • better management and updating
/ na / Not priority. Not believed metadata signif. improves searching with current search engine. Lack of resources. / Yes. Dublin Core on some pages.
University of Waikato / Yes, all pages / Primarily generic tags. some Dublin Core, greater use of DC proposed / Keywords
Description
Author
AuthorEmail
Publishdate
ExpiryDate
PageContact
DC.Language
DC.Rights /
  • improve resource discovery via internal search engine
  • acknowledge intellectual property
/ webpage writers, cataloguers / na / na
University of Western Australia / Selectively. / Currently internal standards / Description
Keywords
Generator (author)
Title /
  • better, consistent indexing by search engines
/ webpage writers / na / na
University of Wollongong / Yes / Combination Dublin Core (anticipate become formal standard) and generic (understood by search engines) / DC elements:
Title
TitleAlternative
Description
CreatorPersonal
Date Created
DateIssued
DateModified
Identifier
Subject
PublishCorporate
Tyoe
Format
Language
Generic element:
Description
Keywords /
  • control over indexing by search engines
/ webpage writers / na / na
Victoria University / No / na / na / na / na / No application or purpose for implementing. Catalogue access sufficient. / No
Victoria Univ. of Wellington / No. Began for new website & stopped doing this in July 2001 / Dublin Core., most widely accepted. Found an automatic generator on web. / Used fields as appropriate. i.e. best suited needs and contained relevant fields. No VUW standards agreed or thesaurus. Discretion of website administrator. / Anticipate future search engines will rely on metadata : investing in future. / Was done by Library website manager / Incumbent left position.
Lack of resources to continue, greater priorities. Significance not widely understood. XML may be better option as there are converters to MARC for inclusion of webpages in library catalogues / Used a template found on the web for automatic generation