I am definitely in the it's a good idea camp on this question, and take it a little further to recommend some pretty specific best practices for how that minimum metadata should be encoded
Sent from my HTC on T-Mobile 4G LTE
----- Reply message -----
To: "Metadata IG"
Subject: [rda-metadata-ig] Minimal metadata concept
Date: Sat, Feb 28, 2015 8:19 AM
One of the issues discussed at a recent RDA outreach workshop was how people felt about "minimal metadata."
Some cautioned that it is potentially a bad idea, while a pluratity seemed in favor of it and could point to good outcomes using .
An example provided at the workshop was that of the Dataset Descriptions: HCLS Community Profile discussed by Michel Dumontier (Stanford). The idea here is to:
Develop a guidance note for reusing existing vocabularies to describe datasets with RDF - Mandatory, recommended, optional descriptors - Identifiers - Versioning - Attribution - Provenance - Content summarization * Recommend vocabulary-linked attributes and value sets
We were perhaps more uniform on the idea expressed by NIST's Bob Hanisch that maximum MD causes a problem since people won't "use it."
Full post: https://rd-alliance.org/group/metadata-ig/post/minimal-metadata-concept....
Manage my subscriptions: https://rd-alliance.org/mailinglist
Stop emails for this post: https://rd-alliance.org/mailinglist/unsubscribe/44734