Significant Properties as Contextual Metadata

Given the desire to maintain both long-term renderability and meaningfulness of data for reuse, increasing attention is being paid to contextual metadata, also known as significant properties. Both the data reuse and digital curation literatures identify significant properties but do not appear to build on one another, in part because of different methodological approaches. In this paper we discuss the significant properties research from both literatures and call for a more integrative approach. We conclude with a discussion of our project, Dissemination Information Packages for Information Reuse (DIPIR), which features the boundary spanning we advocate between these two research communities.

[1]  Ann Zimmerman,et al.  Beyond the Data Deluge: A Research Agenda for Large-Scale Data Sharing and Reuse , 2011, Int. J. Digit. Curation.

[2]  Kevin D. Ashley,et al.  The Significant Properties of Vector Images , 2007 .

[3]  Gina Green,et al.  Networks of contextualized data: a framework for cyberinfrastructure data management , 2009, CACM.

[4]  Brian Matthews,et al.  The Significant Properties of Software: A Study , 2008 .

[5]  Reagan Moore,et al.  Towards self-validating knowledge-based archives , 2001, Proceedings Eleventh International Workshop on Research Issues in Data Engineering. Document Management for Data Intensive Business and Scientific Applications. RIDE 2001.

[6]  Hollie White,et al.  Considering Personal Organization: Metadata Practices of Scientists , 2010 .

[7]  Ccsds Secretariat,et al.  Reference Model for an Open Archival Information System (OAIS) , 1999 .

[8]  Melissa H. Cragin,et al.  Constructing Data Curation Profiles , 2009, Int. J. Digit. Curation.

[9]  Sheila Morrissey.  The economy of free and open source software in the preservation of digital artefacts , 2010, Libr. Hi Tech.

[10]  Tora K. Bikson,et al.  Carrying Authentic, Understandable and Usable Digital Records Through Time , 1999 .

[11]  Richard M. Davis,et al.  Significant Properties of E-Learning Objects for Digital Preservation (The SPeLOs Report) , 2008 .

[12]  Melissa H. Cragin,et al.  Scientific Data Collections and Distributed Collective Practice , 2006, Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW).

[13]  Sanjeev Khanna,et al.  Why and Where: A Characterization of Data Provenance , 2001, ICDT.

[14]  Louise Corti,et al.  Re-using archived qualitative data – where, how, why? , 2007 .

[15]  Esther Conway.  Curating Atmospheric Data for long term use: Infrastructure and Preservation Issues for the Atmospheric Sciences community , 2009 .

[16]  Marc Berg,et al.  The contextual nature of medical information , 1999, Int. J. Medical Informatics.

[17]  Alexander Ball,et al.  Challenges and Issues Relating to the Use of Representation Information for the Digital Curation of Crystallography and Engineering Data , 2008, Int. J. Digit. Curation.

[18]  Reagan Moore,et al.  Automated Validation of Trusted Digital Repository Assessment Criteria , 2007, J. Digit. Inf..

[19]  Mary Vardigan,et al.  ICPSR meets OAIS: applying the OAIS reference model to the social science archive context , 2007 .

[20]  Ben Anderson,et al.  What Are Data? The Many Kinds of Data and Their Implications for Data Re-Use , 2007, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[21]  Ann Zimmerman,et al.  New Knowledge from Old Data , 2008 .

[22]  Nancy A. Van House,et al.  Cooperative knowledge work and practices of trust: sharing environmental planning data sets , 1998, CSCW '98.

[23]  Martin Pilgram,et al.  Consultative Committee For Space Data Systems , 2009 .

[24]  K. Knorr-Cetina,et al.  Epistemic cultures : how the sciences make knowledge , 1999 .

[25]  Cliff Lampe,et al.  "The Old Version Flickers More": Digital Preservation from the User's Perspective , 2007 .

[26]  Ixchel M. Faniel,et al.  Reusing Scientific Data: How Earthquake Engineering Researchers Assess the Reusability of Colleagues’ Data , 2010, Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW).

[27]  Andrew C. Simpson,et al.  Collaboration and Trust in Healthcare Innovation: The eDiaMoND Case Study , 2005, Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW).

[28]  N. House.  Digital libraries and practices of trust: Networked biodiversity information , 2002 .