Existing standards-based metadata approaches and principles

Contemporary library metadata standards are defined by authoritative, expert-led, pre-defined structures where librarians create metadata content from a prescribed list of controlled (pre-set) vocabularies and users passively access information objects. These standards are underpinned by metadata principles including the principle of sufficiency and necessity, user convenience, representation and standardisation. However, these principles focus on metadata simplicity and fail to adequately represent the diversity of views and perspectives that exist in library users. This suggests a need for alternative metadata approaches that reflect changing users' needs and emerging technological trends.

Keywords

Standards-based metadata; a priori metadata; metadata principles; metadata structure; metadata granularity; metadata quality; metadata interoperability

In contemporary standards-based metadata approaches, values assigned to elements during metadata creation are rigorously checked for consistency. This happens before the metadata is made available to users through, for example the Online Public Access Catalogue (OPAC). These tasks often require rigorous adherence to applicable cataloguing and classification rules and regulations. Thus, metadata generation is chiefly done by experts (librarians), implicitly presuming that metadata creation and management is their sole prerogative. These cataloguers and classifiers register their collections and adopt one or more of several extant cataloguing standards, such as the Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules (AACR), Dewey Decimal Classification (DDC), Library of Congress Classification (LC) and Machine-Readable Cataloguing (MARC). However, as the volume of digital information increases, assigning metadata to tens, if not hundreds, of millions of digital information objects has become a progressively more expensive endeavour. Finding a viable approach for creating, maintaining and utilising metadata is therefore essential.

Foundational principles, rather than case-based rules for library cataloguing, provide professionals with a consistent conceptual underpinning when constructing coherent catalogues of information objects (Lubetzky, 1955). In this context, a principle is one or more sets of abstract, general, propositions that guide practitioners in the development of guidelines and rules, which in turn direct practice (Duval et al., 2002; IFLA, 2009; Svenonius, 2000). There have been efforts at developing underpinning principles for standards. According to the International Federation of Library Associations (IFLA) (2009) and Svenonius (2000), some of the major foundational principles that guide standards-based metadata approaches include:

 the principle of sufficiency and necessity;

 the principle of user convenience;

 the principle of representation;

 the principle of standardisation.

As these eventually dictate how decisions are made in practice, it is important to consider their consistency, utility and relevance with the evolving information landscape.

The principle of sufficiency and necessity

The origin of the principle of sufficiency and necessity comes from the history of modern cataloguing (Hoffman, 2009; IFLA, 2009; OCLC, 2009; Spiteri, 2012; Svenonius, 2000). Pioneers of library cataloguing such as Cutter, Panizzi and Lubetzky are said to have advocated a metadata approach that caters for simplicity (Svenonius, 2000). Building on earlier works, the IFLA (2009) also used this principle to underpin the design of its Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) model, the most dominant model that serves as a reference when designing contemporary metadata and discovery systems.

As described by the IFLA (2009, p. 2), the principle of sufficiency and necessity states that 'only those data elements in descriptions and controlled forms of names for access that are required to fulfil user tasks and are essential to uniquely identify an entity should be included'. It is tacitly assumed that superfluous metadata distracts and confuses users, thus the principle states that metadata should be kept minimal and simple by recording only the metadata pertinent to find information objects. This principle was in accord with the IFLA's principle of economy, where it states that 'when alternative ways exist to achieve a goal, preference should be given to the way that best furthers overall economy (i.e. the least cost or the simplest approach)' (IFLA, 2009, p. 2).

Since creating metadata records is an expensive endeavour, the principle of sufficiency and necessity is considered to provide efficiency and, thus, is considered a cost saving mechanism. The principle assumes that the cost of metadata increases proportionally with the number of metadata elements considered, thus metadata agencies are encouraged to only include metadata elements that are essential (Svenonius, 2000, p. 76). As Svenonius points out, standards-setting agencies (e.g. IFLA), bibliographic data suppliers (e.g. OCLC) and library metadata experts largely predicated their efforts on the principle of sufficiency and necessity. Thus, as Svenonius (2000, p. 77) notes, librarians apply the rule of Occam's razor, whereby metadata that is considered superfluous is eliminated. However, such view of simplicity may significantly impact users' needs.

The principle of user convenience

The principle of user convenience addresses the importance of designing metadata systems with users in mind (Hoffman, 2009; IFLA, 2009; Spiteri, 2012; Svenonius, 2000). Ranganathan, as early as 1931, stressed the centrality of the user in his 'The Five Laws of Library Science' (Denton, 2007, p. 44). One of the first attempts at putting this principle into practice was the move to give users access to the library catalogue (Denton, 2007; IFLA, 2009; Svenonius, 2000). Up until the publication of 'Rules for the Compilation of the Catalogue', by Panizzi in 1841, the main users of library catalogues had been librarians themselves (Wright, 2007). The main objective of Panizzi's rules was to provide access to the right book (including its various editions, if any, as well as to others on a related topic) to the right user, at the right time (Alemu, 2014; Svenonius, 2000; Welsh & Batley, 2012). Panizzi successfully pursued the practice of opening up the library catalogue for consultation by users (Wright, 2007, p. 169).

The practice of opening up the catalogue to users is part and parcel of the general principle of user convenience. This stipulates that metadata decisions, including the choice of controlled vocabularies, reflect users' needs (IFLA, 2009; Spiteri, 2012; Svenonius, 2000). According to Svenonius (2000), important concerns in connection with this include taking users' preferences into account, based on their profiles. Thus, user convenience necessarily implies that metadata in standards-based systems reflect the metadata needs of each user, including the terminologies used for describing information objects, the management of metadata and the display of OPAC results. In other words, a metadata system that fully complies with the principle of user convenience must incorporate practical provision for delivering personalised and user-centred services (Hoffman, 2009). Customisation may consist of changing the way the metadata is displayed, filtered or navigated through. However, it might be difficult to fully meet each and every one of these personalised and idiosyncratic needs in physical libraries.

Contemporary standards-based metadata approaches, although acknowledging the importance of the principle of user convenience, face serious challenges when attempting to adhere to the principle as a whole (Hoffman, 2009). Some of the constraints can be attributed to the inherent limitations of physical libraries and the costs associated with metadata creation and maintenance. Hoffman (2009) maintains that, although standards-setting agencies and libraries are prone to proclaiming that their systems are user-focused/user-centred, in fact contemporary standards including such prominent ones as FRBR and Resource Description and Access (RDA), tend to focus on devising universal and uniform systems. One common illustration of uniformity in metadata standards is the way metadata is displayed in OPACs, which mostly consist of single, uniform interfaces and homogenous navigation/search techniques, a consequence of the objectivistic focus of standards-setting agencies as well as implementing institutions, such as libraries (Hoffman, 2009). Other examples include hierarchies and categories, which are fixed and, hence, non-customisable by either librarians or users (Shirky, 2005). Hoffman acknowledges that customisation has not been made possible due to the fact that most bibliographic data and metadata systems are acquired from external sources and, thus, are often difficult to modify. In addition, Hoffman (2009) points to an absence of mechanisms for maintaining user profiles, which could have been harnessed for customisation and personalisation.

Perhaps the most important constraint for realising the principle of user convenience arises from a basic assumption adopted by standards-based approaches, namely, the treatment of the user as a passive...