a review of semantic interoperability of ead metadata ... · info 662 dr. park spring 2011 6/8/2011...

A review of semantic 1

Running head: A REVIEW OF SEMANTIC INTEROPERABILITY

A Review of Semantic Interoperability of EAD Metadata Schemes at Two

Archives: The University of Minnesota, Northwest Architectural Archive,

and the University of Texas, Alexander Architectural Archive.

James Gross

Drexel University

INFO 662

Dr. Park

Spring 2011

6/8/2011

I certify that the below work is mine and that all the work cited below is mine. James gross

Purpose

The purpose of this project is to examine and compare the EAD metadata schemes at two archival repositories housing similar archival collections and gauge the effectiveness of their respective schemes in regard to semantic interoperability, consistency, and uniformity. Metadata Scheme: EAD

The EAD (Encoded Archival Description) scheme is the “de facto” standard for the encoding of finding aids for use in a networked (online) environment (University of Texas, n.d.). It is taken from the Dublin Core element of 15 simplified metadata fields which can be applied across many formats and domains.

EAD is an international standard for encoding finding aids established to meet the needs of both users and archivists (Combs, et al., 2010). EAD (Encoded Archival Description) is represented in XML (Extensible Markup Language), a data format that ensures data longevity when migrated from one software environment to another (Combs, et al., 2010).

EAD can be produced from, or mapped to, a variety of formats, such as MARC, Dublin Core, and HTML, which makes it a useful format for data mapping to a variety of formats (Combs, et al., 2010). In addition researchers can be assured of greater efficiency in searching EAD encoded finding aids because EAD enables better searching and subsequent delivery from a single source document (Combs, et al., 2010). EAD allows the standardization of collection information in finding aids within and across repositories (Society of American Archivists, 2010). Goal of EAD:

A goal of EAD is to make archival resources from many institutions accessible online to web-based users (Library, 2006). EAD is the metadata scheme which is utilized to standardize the archival finding aid. Per an article by Carpenter & Park, the EAD DTD (Document Type Definitions) can consist of up to 146 element tags (Carpenter & Park, 2009, p.135). Due to the large quantity of tags, the Park and Carpenter EAD study noted the necessity of limiting their focus to those elements which demonstrated the most frequent inconsistency (Carpenter & Park, p. 135). The Carpenter & Park study focused on 4 main elements: <eadid>, <filedesc>, <profiledesc>, and <revisiondesc> (2009, pp.144-145). Based on class guidelines, my paper will selectively focus on those metadata elements which appeared to fulfill the functional requirements as utilized by their respective archival institutions. I will only focus on those elements which appear to be the most relevant, consistent, and/or inconsistent, based on the online method(s) of catalog access and retrieval afforded by both archives.

Metadata consistency and archival description

Metadata consistency in archival records can be difficult to measure as an archive may use its own judgment in regard to the level of descriptive collection information displayed in a record. Not all collections are processed at 100%, and those which are fully processed may vary in terms of the level of descriptive information available. In other words, limited staff may make it difficult for archives to fully process and/or describe all materials in a particular collection. Finding aids are typically created to give at least a basic overview of the collection’s contents. Basic description will usually include elements at the <eadheader> level as well as at the <archdesc> level. Some collections may rate a more detailed description at the file or item level. This inevitably results in a degree of inconsistency in regard to collection descriptive data.

In reviewing metadata schemes, one must be cognizant for the need to identify those elements whose usage is consistent with established metadata schemes and enhances interoperability. Other EAD studies:

In ascertaining whether any pre-existing EAD studies exist, the Carpenter & Park and study noted,”…there are no extant studies evaluating EAD metadata records” (Carpenter & Park, 2005, p. 135). In terms of which EAD elements are deemed to be the most important, Dr Park, in her INFO662 lecture, noted that, ”…metadata quality can be assessed based on…functional requirements” (Park, week 8 lecture). EAD Guidelines

The basic guideline used for this study is the Dublin Core to EAD Crosswalk, referred to as the EAD Application Guidelines for Version 1.0, published by the Society of American Archivists (Society of American Archivists, 1999b) as listed at: www.loc.gov/ead/ag/agappb.html. There is also a more detailed crosswalk of data elements at: http://systems.lib.clemson.edu/wiki/index.php/NCEAD_Appendices. The Society of American Archivists also published the “EAD Tag Library,” which lists all valid EAD tags. For logistical reasons and per the INFO662 instructor suggestion, I have opted to limit my review to the EAD tags most frequently used as well as select locally defined tags.

Project Methods

The two repositories chosen were the University of Minnesota Northwest Architectural Archive http://special.lib.umn.edu/manuscripts/web2005/naaEAD.html. and the University of Texas, Alexander Architectural Archive http://www.lib.utexas.edu/apl/aaa/collections.html. For the purposes of brevity I will be referring to the above two institutions as the: University of Minnesota archive and the University of Texas archive.

In my research, I found that both archives offered an extensive collection of materials, textual and mixed formats, which relate to the field of architecture. Both archives were examined for their EAD metadata quality and consistency as identified thru records from each archive. Neither archive had an online listed local metadata creation guide. The collections from both archives primarily dealt with subject matter pertaining to their respective geographic regions. A total of sixty records were selected, thirty from each repository. XML catalog entry mappings from EAD display labels were utilized. Controlled vocabularies used by each repository were determined.

Each record was examined for metadata quality, consistency, semantic interoperability, and use of controlled vocabularies. The EAD application guidelines, version 1.0 (EAD crosswalk) from the Library of Congress was utilized (Library, 1999b). It is based on the 15 elements in the Dublin Core (DC) element set.

Repository assessment:

In my assessment of the two archival institutions, I reviewed 30 metadata records from each archive. I examined these metadata records for issues of consistency as well as areas of non-conformity. For the purposes of this paper, I analyzed and noted usage of select tag elements at both the <eadheader> level as well as at the <archdesc> level.

In terms of online collection access, I observed that access to each institution’s online catalog entries was solely via the “title” element. Both institutions had accessible XML data with EAD mapping. Neither archive had a listed local metadata creation guide, though the University of Texas library, in a different department website, had some general information on EAD for its library science school (University of Texas, n.d.) The University of Minnesota archive appeared to use concise titles for its collection holdings. In contrast, I encountered several instances of seemingly superfluous wording among the University of Texas collection titles. I also encountered a large number of broken XML links, accounting for approximately 50%, within the University of Texas online catalog. Both institutions have accessible XML data with EAD mapping.

Metadata Quality

University of Minnesota Library, Northwest Architectural Archive:

This archive does not have local guidelines for its metadata scheme. This institution identifies their collection goals on their main homepage. The EAD metadata maps to two distinct levels: <eadheader> and<archdesc>. In regard to tag usage, tag uniformity was quite good, though not all EAD tags were used.

Chart 1

(Dublin core to EAD) University of Minnesota Archive: Partial list of most frequently occurring metadata elements:

Dublin Core EAD location Repository review % usage

Title Eadheader 30 out of 30 records 100%

Contributor Eadheader 30 out of 30 records 100%

Publisher Eadheader (repository) 30 out of 30 records 100%

Date Eadheader 30 out of 30 records 100%

Address Eadheader 30 out of 30 records 100%

Creator Eadheader 30 out of 30 records 100%

Language Eadheader 30 out of 30 records 100%

Eadid Eadheader 30 out of 30 records 100%

Tag usage at the <eadheader> level was consistent. Important tags such as title, date, publisher, and eadid were used at 100% (see Table A, appendix).

Of note, at the <eadheader> level, this repository utilized the optional tags of <address> and <creation> (see Table A, appendix). The address tag is used to identify the address of the repository. The creation tag is used to identify the person or persons responsible for creating the finding aid.

At the <archdesc> level, this archive repeated the title tag at 100% usage. The tag <physloc> was

used at 100% to identify the physical location of the collection (Table A, appendix). The “Subject” and “description” tags were used in 100% of the records. The <bioghist> tag, which gives the biographic history of the subject, was used at 86% (see Table A, appendix).

Tags pertaining to the collection materials included: <otherfindaid> tag used at 80% (Table A, appendix), <accessrestrict> at 100%, and <userestrict> at 100% (Table A, appendix). <otherfindaid> tag usage was at 80% (Table A, appendix). This repository appeared to be consistent in its usage of MARC tag coding.

See Tables F-I (appendix) for a breakdown by collection and tag element for University of Minnesota archive records.

University of Texas, Alexander Architectural Archive:

This archive is also lacking local guidelines for its metadata scheme. I accidentally located a definition for EAD within this university (different university department), but it gave no mention of, or information on, the Alexander archive metadata scheme. This archive does identify their institutional collection goals. As in the case of the University of Minnesota archive, this archive’s EAD metadata also maps to two distinct levels: <eadheader> and <archdesc>.

At the <eadheader> level, this repository appeared to also use most of the EAD tags. Specific usage was noted in regard to elements title and publisher. These tags were at 100% (Table A, appendix). The <creator> tag was also at 100%. I was surprised to see the <unitdate> tag usage at 93% as my earlier class review of 6 records had shown it to be 100% (see Chart 2 below, also Table A, appendix).

Chart 2:

(Dublin core to EAD) University of Texas Archive Partial List of most frequently occurring metadata elements:

DC EAD location Repository review % usage

Title Eadheader 30 out of 30 records 100%

Publisher Eadheader (repository) 30 out of 30 records 100%

Creator Eadheader 30 out of 30 records 100%

Language Eadheader 30 out of 30 records 100%

eadid Eadheader 30 out of 30 records 100%

date Archdesc 26 out of 30 records 93%

The University of Texas archive usage of the <revisiondesc> tag was at 43% (Table A, appendix). This tag was not used by the University of Minnesota archive. At the <archdesc> level, the University of Texas archive utilized tags with far less consistency than did the University of Minnesota archive.

In regard to University of Texas archive tag usage, uniformity appeared to be mediocre, with a number of EAD tags used sporadically. For example, the <physloc> was not used, the <otherfindaid> was at 16% usage, and <acqinfo> was only used at 6% usage (Table A, appendix).

See Tables E, J-M (Appendix) for a breakdown by collection and tag element for the University of Texas archive records.

Data consistency

Comparison of the “title” (MARC 245) element:

Based on my research, I identified the “title” as being the only searchable element within the online catalog as provided by both archives.

University of Minnesota Library, Northwest Architectural Archive:

For the University of Minnesota archive, one selects (clicks) the collection title and is brought to a second screen. (see below) Then the user employs a right-click for the XML file.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Contents Summary/Organization | Administrative/Access Info | Related Materials | Other Finding Aids | Indexed Terms/Access Points

See (Table B, appendix): screenshot of the main webpage, University of Minnesota archive.

In examining the data from this field, I observed that the titles appeared to be uniform in nature, with a minimum of extraneous wording. For example: Look at the William L Alban papers in Chart 3 (also see Table D, appendix). You can see that the title element is succinct and accurate.

Chart 3:

Sample of University of Minnesota Archive, title elements

Collection title (MARC tag 245) Collection catalog entry

William L Alban papers William L. Alban Papers

Close Associates papers Close Associates Papers

Frederick Corser papers Frederick Corser Papers

Paul Philippe Cret drawings Paul Philippe Cret Drawings

Andrews Hotel collection Andrews Hotel Collection

Wesley G. Wells papers Wesley G Wells papers

University of Texas, Alexander Architectural Archive:

The University of Texas archive permits searches by title element. The patron selects (clicks) the collection title and is then brought to a second screen. The user then has the option to click an xml file. Due to the size of the html encoded screen, I am unable to display the entire screen in this report. A partial screenshot is available (Table C, appendix) of the main webpage.

In examining the “title” field data from this archive, it was apparent that there were some wording inconsistencies. If you look at some of the collection titles (Chart 4), it is obvious that there is divergence from the catalog entries and the MARC 245 tag data.

Chart 4: University of Texas Archive, Examples of divergence in title field:

record <eadheader><titleproper> Collection catalog entry

5 Blake Alexander (1924-); architectural drawings and manuscript material

Drury Blakeley Alexander: An Inventory of his Drawings, Papers, and Photographic Material, [1887]-1995

6 Joel Warren Barna records, The see-through years,

Joel Warren Barna: An Inventory of his Records for The See-Through Years, c.1992

7 American planning Association- Texas Chapter:

American Planning Association – Texas Chapter: The History of Planning in Texas Project Records, 1977-1994

8 Bartlett Cocke papers Bartlett Cocke: An Inventory of his Papers

9 Colley Associates drawings Colley Associates drawings, 1960s

10 Corneil G. Curtis collection Corneil G. Curtis: An Inventory of his Drawings, c.1930s-1950s

I also encountered another issue in regard to the title field. I found a wide divergence in the information (see chart 5 below) placed within the <eadheader><titleproper> field, versus the <archdesc><unittitle> field.

Chart 5:

University of Texas Archive, Example of divergence in title field:

<eadheader><titleproper> <archdesc><unittitle> record

“Walter T. Rolfe: An Inventory of his Records, Drawings, and Paintings”

“Walter T. Rolfe (1900-1967) Archival records, drawings and paintings, Architectural education; personal papers”

25

I extracted the 30 collection titles from the University of Texas archive. If you look at some of the collection titles (see Table E, appendix), several of the titles, such as collections #6, Joel Warren Barna collection; collection #25, Walter T. Rolfe; and collection# 28, Robert H. H.

Hugman, appeared to have a divergence in the usage of the <eadheader><titleproper> field and the <archdesc><unittitle> field. The Rolfe collection title (see Chart 5 above) is an example. Collection #28 also had a strange issue with two middle initials; the title data was verified.

While it is beyond the parameters of this paper to establish the reasons for this divergence, it was obvious from the XML data that there was a wide degree of divergence in the usage of the title element within the University of Texas archive collection. This did not appear to be the case for the title elements within the 30 records examined from the University of Minnesota archive.

Date Usage:

The date element is another important item for ensuring interoperability. Consistency is important for this field. The University of Minnesota archive employed this field at 100% while the University of Texas archive employed this field at 86% (Table A, appendix).

I carefully examined the date fields for all 60 records. I was able to identify some noticeable differences in how the dates were listed. Table F (see appendix) shows a complete list of the date elements. An abbreviated sample is shown below:

Chart 6:

University of Texas Archive & University of Minnesota archive: <unitdate> element inconsistencies

University of Minnesota Archive University of Texas Archive

Collection# <archdesc><unitdate> level <archdesc><unitdate> level

5 1915, circa 1925 [1887]-1995

6 1938-1980 c. 1992

7 Circa 1880s 1911-2000

8 120 “none”

10 1918-1947 c. 1930s-1950s

11 1899-1939 c. 1921-1941

12 1916 1962, 1964, c.1993, 1995-1996

15 1925 c.1930-1940;1962,1967,1986

21 1910 “undated”

24 1926-1948 1957 (found in) <abstract>

26 1966-1986 early 20th century

33 1931 c.1914-1981

In general, the University of Minnesota archive records appeared to utilize the “date” field data according to the Library of Congress EAD design principles (Library, 2006). Based on my sample size, (n=30), I only observed two possible issues within the University of Minnesota “date” data (see Chart 5 above): record #7 is “circa 1880s” and record #8 has an apparent typo.

In contrast, the University of Texas archive records appeared to utilize the “date” field data with a lesser degree of conformity to standardized rules. For example, a number of the University of Texas records utilized a range of shorthand references to time spans. The symbol of “c.” referring to “circa” was used 6 times in my 30 record sampling. That equates to a 20% usage.

Record #5 had a date listed in brackets, record #24 had the date located in the abstract field, and record #26 listed the date as “early 20th century.”

In comparing the date field from both archives, it was apparent that was an apparent lack of uniformity in usage of the date field for my sampling of records from the University of Texas archive.

Creation of the records:

An important aspect of a collection is often the context surrounding its creation. Information on the collection’s author can serve as a focal point for discovering and accessing historical resources within an archival repository. The element, <bioghist> is important as it facilitates understanding of the collection’s biography or history of the creating individual/group. If you look at Chart 6 (below), you will see that the usage of this tag was 86% for the University of Minnesota archive and 100% for the University of Texas archive. Chart 7 University of Texas Archive & University of Minnesota Archive: Usage of <bioghist> element

University of Minnesota archive University of Texas archive

<bioghist> <bioghist>

26 out of 30 records 30 out of 30 records

86% usage 100% usage

In Chart 8 (below), you will see 4 elements which had inconsistent usage by both archives. Based on the collection analysis, the “Physloc” element was used at 100% by the University of Minnesota archive, but not by the University of Texas archive. And, the “type’ element was not used by the University of Minnesota archive, but was used at 100% by the University of Texas archive.

Chart 8

Select elements least used:

Element University of Minnesota archive University of Texas archive

Physloc 100% 0%

Type 0% 100%

Address 100% 0%

revisiondesc 0% 43%

Controlled Vocabularies

Controlled vocabularies are predefined and authorized terms expressed as preferred and equivalent terms (Park, week 6 lecture). Their purpose is to enable consistency in the resource description (park, week 6 lecture). Controlled access terms are an important means of providing uniform searches of encoded finding aids. Controlled vocabularies help to reduce ambiguity inherent in search syntax (language) where the same concept can be given different names with resulting confusion. Within the greater library community, there appears to be widespread use and acceptance of the Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH) and the Library of Congress Name Authority File (LCNAF) for controlled vocabulary for subject terms.

In reviewing usage of controlled vocabularies I examined each of the records (30 per archive) for use of the <persname> or <corpname> within the subsection of <controlaccess> <archdesc>. Both archives appeared to be very consistent with their usage of the LC Subject Headings (LCSH) as well as the Library of Congress Named Authority file (LCNAF). I found that for both the University of Minnesota archive and the University of Texas archive, usage was at 100% (Table A, appendix).

The University of Texas archive appeared to use a greater quantity of LC authority tags than did the University of Minnesota. But, the University of Minnesota archive appeared to utilize authority tags on a more consistent basis. There were occasional variances from LC Authority terms by both archives.

I also examined usage of the subject authority element (MARC tag 650). One of the subject languages in widespread use today is the Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH).

The University of Minnesota archive had 96% usage of these tags while the University of Texas archive only had 44% usage (Table A, appendix). Both archives used the LCSH for their descriptive data.

Metadata consistency conclusions

I identified the “title” element as the most important tag due to its usage for identification and retrieval of the pertinent collection catalog record. The University of Minnesota’s title entries appeared to be uniform and consistent in nature. In contrast, the University of Texas archive had some titles which often appeared to contain non-germane wording. Specifically, title usage within the <eadheader> did not coincide with title usage within the <profiledescr> element. I would characterize this pattern of usage of the title element as being inconsistent and potentially affecting interoperability across EAD repositories.

Other elements worth noting were the “date“(Chart 6); “physloc,” “type,” “address” and “revisiondesc” (Chart 8). Though both archives utilized the date field at 100%, there was a greater degree of inconsistency within the date field of the University of Texas records than within the University of Minnesota records (Chart 6). The “address” field was found to be at 100% usage by the University of Minnesota archive, but was not utilized at all by the University of Texas archive (Chart 6).

The “physloc” field was used by the University of Minnesota archive but not by the University of Texas archive (Chart 6). A possible reason could be that the archive’s records at the university of Texas archive are housed in 1 location, while the University of Minnesota records identify different storage locations. The “revisiondesc” element was only used at 43% by the University of Texas archive and was not used by the University of Minnesota archive (Chart 8).

As neither archive has written metadata guidelines, I was unable to ascertain the reasons for the apparent disparity in regard to the University of Texas archive’s usage of the date field. I was also unable to explain the reason for the lack of usage of the address field within the University of Texas archive records.


The “type” element was another interesting surprise. As records from both archives contained a mixture of papers, maps, and other materials, it would seem logical for both archives to include this element in their metadata. The University of Minnesota archive did not use this element while the University of Texas archive used it at 100%.

Interoperability

Interoperability is one of the most crucial issues affecting metadata. It is primarily achieved through online access of electronic catalogs. Metadata schemes are systems (like EAD) that provide authoritative data about data elements. This formalized data enables the institution’s catalog to share collection information in a standardized format. This results in semantic interoperability of metadata across domains.

I encountered one obvious barrier to interoperability within these two archives. Both archives did have their online catalog organized by title entry, with viewable XML data. And, all of the catalog information from both archives was viewable online. But, I encountered an astounding 50% failure rate (approximately) when trying to access the XML metadata files within the University of Texas archive’s online catalog. This limited the number of metadata records which I could examine for this paper. While this is not a required option, it demonstrated an issue in regard to inconsistency and interoperability.

Semantic interoperability conclusions

A properly-encoded metadata schema is essential as it provides users with data fields containing pertinent information regarding a resource. This schema, when properly supplied with resource data elements, permits the user to use search syntax in order to browse and locate the relevant catalog entry. Within the catalog entry would be related finding aid information pertaining to a particular collection. Consistency of data and proper input of this data is essential.

As a metadata scheme, EAD does have the potential to provide semantic interoperability across disparate archival collections. I found one of the greatest issues to be the lack of uniform usage, and consistency in the application of the “title” element tag. I found that the inconsistent use of several elements, compounded by a lack of local metadata creation guidelines, created barriers to semantic interoperability.

Institutional comparison

The objective of this paper was to selectively focus on analyzing those EAD metadata elements contained within the 60 chosen XML encoded collection records from two EAD institutional archives. Elements were examined for data consistency and uniformity. As mentioned at the beginning of this paper, neither archive had a published local metadata scheme, though an EAD page was later located by accident at the University of Texas on a different departmental (ischool) website. Based on my limited data (30 records per archive), it appeared that the University of Minnesota, Northwest Architectural Archive’s online EAD metadata, appeared to contain a minimum of errors within its XML code and could be considered sufficient for semantic interoperability. For example, the “title” tag was used with a minimal of excessive wording. The “date” field was, for the most part, accurate. And the University of Minnesota, Northwest Architectural Archive’s EAD metadata appeared to make effective usage of controlled data points as well as the subject field.

Unfortunately, I was unable to report the same results in regard to the University of Texas Alexander Architectural Archive’s online EAD metadata. In my research, I encountered a higher percentage of inconsistency in regard to the collection “title” element. I found that the title data did not always match between the <eadheader> and the <archdesc> sections. And, I found numerous instances where the title data could have been briefer and more concise. My research also found that for the 60 records reviewed, the University of Texas, Alexander

Architectural Archive’s EAD metadata had only a 44% usage for the subject field, versus a 96% usage rate by the University of Minnesota, Northwest Architectural Archive. And, as mentioned earlier, I encountered a roughly 50% read error in the viewing of the University of Texas, Alexander Architectural Archive’s XML files. Though not essential for patron access, the XML page errors indicated to me a lack of overall consistency in regard to the implementation of the EAD scheme. In closing, my research data found (in general) a high level of consistency and uniformity in the metadata for the collection records (n=30) held by the University of Minnesota Northwest

Architectural Archive. These findings appear to indicate that this institution has achieved a high degree of semantic interoperability for its metadata records. In the case of the University of Texas, Alexander Architectural Archive, it was apparent from my research data (n=30), that this archive has not yet achieved a sufficient level of consistency and uniformity in regard to its metadata usage. I encountered wide variances in title data, with as well as variations in date formats. This indicated to me that this institution needs to review and revise its metadata coding. The existence of numerous broken XML links by the University of Texas, Alexander Architectural

Archive, while not required for patron catalog usage, suggested a lack of quality control in regard to metadata usage. Based on my research, I would probably be compelled to give this archive a marginal grade for semantic interoperability, data consistency, and uniformity. The primary goal of the EAD scheme is to enable the access and retrieval of descriptive information on a collection or holding. Semantic interoperability, along with consistency and uniformity of data elements are essential to achieve this goal. In order for a researcher to access a collection, the XML data must be accurate in 3 important aspects: 1) accuracy in the element data, especially the title field, 2) properly encoded html and xml to enable online access and retrieval, and 3) effective use of controlled vocabulary access points and subject description. At the beginning of this paper I cited an article by Park whom noted the lack of existing studies for the measurement of EAD encoded records for semantic interoperability and data uniformity. Park (2009) and Pitti (2005), in their respective studies, also noted the difficulties in analyzing all 146 EAD elements. Park made a useful suggestion along these lines. Park commented that there is a need to: ”…build a common data model that is interoperable across EAD repositories” (Park, 2009, p. 149). I agree that such a data model would undoubtedly enhance future studies of EAD repository records in regard to their usage of semantic interoperability, consistency, as well as uniformity.

Appendix

Table A Comparison of the University of Minnesota Library, Northwest Architectural Archive; and the University of Texas Library, Alexander Architectural Archive.

Element

Name

Element Description MARC # University of

Minnesota

Library,

Architectura

l Archive

University of

Texas

Library,

Architectura

l Archive

Percentag

e across

collections

<eadheader>

Title The name given to the resource. <titleproper> 245 100% 100% 100%

Contributor* An entity responsible for making contributions to the content of the resource.

100% 100% 100%

Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available. 260 100% 100% 100%

Date * A date of an event in the lifecycle of the resource.

100% 86% 93%

Address A wrapper element within the <filedesc> portion of <eadheader>. Address of the publisher. 100% 0% 50%

Creation Subelement of the <profiledesc> portion of <eadheader>. Information about the encoding of the finding aid. 100% 100% 100%

revisiondesc Optional subelement of <eadheader>. Information about changes or alterations to the encoded finding aid. 0% 43% 21%

Language * A language of the intellectual content of the resource.

41 100% 100% 100%

Identifier * An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context. <eadid>

100% 100% 100%

<archdesc>

Format The physical or digital manifestation of the resource.

300 100% 100% 100%

Repository

852 100% 100% 100%

Coverage The extent or scope of the content of the resource.

100% 100% 100%

Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the content of the resource.

100,

110 100% 100% 100%

Type The nature or genre of the content of the resource.

655 0% 100% 50%

Description An account of the content of the resource. <abstract>

520 100% 100% 100%

Subject A topic of the content of the resource.

650 96% 44% 70%

Physloc

Location of the collection 100% 0% 50%

Locally added

elements

Accessrestrict

restrictions on accessing

collection 506 100% 100% 100%

userestrict

restrictions on use. A subelement of

Administrative Information

<admininfo>.

540 100% 100% 100%

prefercite preferred citation of collection 524 100% 100% 100%

Acqinfo 541 46% 6% 26%

processinfo amount of collection processed 583 0% 100% 50%

arrangement 351 26% 6% 16%

Bioghist

biography of the collection's

author 545 86% 100% 93%

Otherfindingai

d other finding aids 80% 16% 48%


Table B

Table C

Table D University of Minnesota Library, Northwest Architectural Archive: Sample “title” element comparison Collection number #

<eadheader><titleproper> <archdesc><unittitle> (MARC 245)

5 William L Alban papers William L Alban papers

9 Andrews Hotel collection Andrews Hotel collection

10 Wesley G. Wells papers Wesley G. Wells papers

Table E University of Texas Library, Alexander Architectural Archive: “title” element comparison (data begins at #5 due to excel numbering) Collection number #

<eadheader><titleproper> <archdesc><unittitle> (MARC 245)

5 Blake Alexander: An Inventory of his Drawings, Papers, and Photographic material

Blake Alexander (1924-): Architectural drawings and manuscript material

6 Joel Warren Barna: The See-Through Years Joel Warren Barna: An Inventory of his Records for The See-Through Years

7 American Planning Association- Texas Chapter: The History of planning in Texas Project

American Planning Association- Texas Chapter: The History of planning in Texas Project Records

8 Bartlett Cocke: An Inventory of his Papers Bartlett Cocke papers

9 Colley Associates drawings Colley Associates drawings

10 Corneil G. Curtis: An Inventory of his Drawings

Corneil G. Curtis collection

11 John Tarleton Agricultural College: An Inventory of its Collection

John Tarleton Agricultural College collection

12 California Agricultural collection, An Inventory of its Drawings

California Agricultural collection

13 New Mexico Architectural collection: An Inventory of Drawings

New Mexico Architectural collection

14 Oklahoma Architectural collection: An Inventory of Drawings

Oklahoma Architectural collection

15 Mexico Architectural collection: An Inventory of Drawings

Mexico Architectural collection

16 Maryland Architectural collection: An Inventory of Drawings

Maryland Architectural collection

17 Connecticut Architectural collection: An Inventory of Drawings

Connecticut Architectural collection

18 Colorado Architectural collection: An Inventory of Drawings

Colorado Architectural collection

19 Illinois Architectural collection: An Inventory of Drawings ad other Materials

Illinois Architectural collection

20 Indiana Architectural collection: An Inventory of Drawings

Indiana Architectural collection

21 Kansas Architectural collection: An Inventory of Drawings

Kansas Architectural collection

22 R. M. Williamson: An Inventory of his Dallas, Texas, Plan Books and Advertisements

R. M. Williamson. Dallas, Texas, Plan Books and Advertisements

23 Edward Duke Squibb collection Edward Duke Squibb collection

24 Greece Architectural collection: An inventory of Drawings

Greece Architectural collection

25 Walter T. Rolfe: An Inventory of his Records, Drawings, and Paintings

Walter T. Rolfe (1900-1967) Archival records, drawings and paintings, Architectural education; personal papers

26 Petrich-Saur Lumber Company: An Inventory of its Drawings

Petrich-Saur Lumber Company drawings

27 Wayne Andrews: an Inventory of his Architectural Photographs

Wayne Andrews Architectural photographs collection

28 Robert H. H. Hugman: An Inventory of his Drawings

Robert H. H. Hugman (1902-1980) Drawings, San Antonio River Walk, San Antonio, Texas

29 Wayne Bell papers Wayne Bell papers

30 H. Dan Heyn: An Inventory of his Drawings, Office Records, and Photographic Material

H. Dan Heyn collection

31 Hugh L. McMath papers Hugh L. McMath papers

32 Robert G. Mather papers Robert G. Mather papers

33 Theo S. Maffitt and Theodore S. Mafitt: An Inventory of their Drawings

Theo S. Maffitt and Theodore S. Mafitt drawings

34 Philip Creer: An Inventory of his Papers Philip Creer papers

Table F University of Minnesota archive & University of Texas archive: Date element comparison (data begins at #5 due to excel numbering)

University of Minnesota Archive University of Texas Archive

Collection# <archdesc><unitdate> level <archdesc><unitdate> level

5 1915,circa 1925 [1887]-1995

6 1938-1980 c. 1992

7 Circa 1880s 1911-2000

8 120 none

9 1911-1916 1960s

10 1918-1947 c. 1930s-1950s

11 1899-1939 c. 1921-1941

12 1916 1962, 1964, c.1993, 1995-1996

13 1967-1969 1928,1947,1964,1976-1981

14 1900-1907 1947-1961

15 1925 c.1930-1940;1962,1967,1986

16 1928,1975,1978 1970

17 1910-1961 1961,1981,1989

18 1913-1929 1979-1981

19 1936-1948 1893-1923

20 1931-1958 1955

21 1910 “undated”

22 1908-1918 1919-1930

23 1930-1971 1953-1957

24 1926-1948 1957 (found in) <abstract>


25 1913-1923 1920-1967

26 1966-1986 early 20th century

27 1924,1933 -

28 1924 1938-1939

29 1973-1993 1957-2009

30 1824 1953-2001

31 1913-1915, 1972 1928-1977

32 1905,1917 1958-1984

33 1931 c.1914-1981

34 1857-1975 1927-1990

Table G University of Minnesota Archive: Collection list (n=30) (data begins at #5 due to excel numbering)

University of Minnesota Library, Northwest Architectural Archive

http://special.lib.umn.edu/manuscripts/web2005/naaEAD.html

Collection Reference URL Collection

#

5. William L Alban papers http://special.lib.umn.edu/findaid/xml/naa007.xml 5

6. Close Associates papers http://special.lib.umn.edu/findaid/xml/naa078.xml 6

7. Frederick Corser papers http://special.lib.umn.edu/findaid/xml/naa076.xml 7

8. Paul Philippe Cret drawings http://special.lib.umn.edu/findaid/xml/naa141.xml 8

9. Andrews Hotel collection http://special.lib.umn.edu/findaid/xml/naa116.xml 9

10. Wesley G. Wells papers http://special.lib.umn.edu/findaid/xml/naa047.xml 10

11. Leon Arnal papers http://special.lib.umn.edu/findaid/xml/naa112.xml 11

12. Ashelman and Gage collection http://special.lib.umn.edu/findaid/xml/naa054.xml 12 13. Edward Larrabee Barnes collection http://special.lib.umn.edu/findaid/xml/naa127.xml 13 14. Barnett and Record Company collection http://special.lib.umn.edu/findaid/xml/naa149.xml 14

15. Lambert Bassindale papers http://special.lib.umn.edu/findaid/xml/naa089.xml 15

16. Percy Dwight Bentley collection http://special.lib.umn.edu/findaid/xml/naa186.xml 16

17. Parker Berry collection http://special.lib.umn.edu/findaid/xml/naa109.xml 17 18. Bertrand and Chamberlin collection http://special.lib.umn.edu/findaid/xml/naa168.xml 18

19. Carl R. Betcher collection http://special.lib.umn.edu/findaid/xml/naa034.xml 19

20. P.C. Bettenburg collection http://special.lib.umn.edu/findaid/xml/naa165.xml 20

21. Boehme and Cordella collection http://special.lib.umn.edu/findaid/xml/naa203.xml 21

22. Bray and Nystrom papers http://special.lib.umn.edu/findaid/xml/naa094.xml 22

23. Cone and Peterson papers http://special.lib.umn.edu/findaid/xml/naa084.xml 23

24. Perry E. Crosier Papers http://special.lib.umn.edu/findaid/xml/naa121.xml 24

25. Downs and Eads collection http://special.lib.umn.edu/findaid/xml/naa051.xml 25

26. Thomas Ellerbe papers http://special.lib.umn.edu/findaid/xml/naa004A.xml 26

27. Edward H. Enger collection http://special.lib.umn.edu/findaid/xml/naa207.xml 27

28. C. W. Farnham collection http://special.lib.umn.edu/findaid/xml/naa193.xml 28

29. John Gable collection http://special.lib.umn.edu/findaid/xml/naa191.xml 29

30. John F. Hageman scrapbook http://special.lib.umn.edu/findaid/xml/naa093.xml 30

31. Paul Haugen papers http://special.lib.umn.edu/findaid/xml/naa026.xml 31

32. Kenyon and Maine collection http://special.lib.umn.edu/findaid/xml/naa169.xml 32

33. Frank Kartowicz papers http://special.lib.umn.edu/findaid/xml/naa068.xml 33

34. Frank Mirovsky collection http://special.lib.umn.edu/findaid/xml/naa190.xml 34 Table H

University of Minnesota Archive: <eadheader> (data begins at #5 due to excel numbering)


<eadheader>

Title

(MARC

245) contributor date address creation revisiondesc language identifier Collection

#

1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 5

1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 6

1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 7

1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 8

1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 9

1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 10

1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 11

1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 12

1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 13

1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 14

1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 15

1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 16

1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 17

1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 18

1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 19

1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 20

1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 21

1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 22

1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 23

1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 24

1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 25

1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 26

1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 27

1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 28

1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 29

1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 30

1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 31

1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 32

1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 33

1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 34

30/30=

100%

30/30=

100%

30/30

=100%

30/30=

100%

30/30=

100% 0%

30/30=

100%

30/30=

100%

Table I University of Minnesota Archive: <archdesc> Section

(data begins at #5 due to excel numbering)


<archdesc>

Format

(MARC 300)

Repository

(MARC 852)

creator:

persname/

corpname

(MARC

700,610) type

(description)

scopecontent

(MARC 520)

subject

(MARC

650) physloc Collection

#

1 1 1 0 1 1 1 5

1 1 1 0 1 1 1 6

1 1 1 0 1 1 1 7

1 1 1 0 1 1 1 8

1 1 1 0 1 1 1 9

1 1 1 0 1 1 1 10

1 1 1 0 1 0 1 11

1 1 1 0 1 1 1 12

1 1 1 0 1 0 1 13

1 1 1 0 1 1 1 14

1 1 1 0 1 1 1 15

1 1 1 0 1 1 1 16

1 1 1 0 1 1 1 17

1 1 1 0 1 1 1 18

1 1 1 0 1 1 1 19

1 1 1 0 1 1 1 20

1 1 1 0 1 1 1 21

1 1 1 0 1 1 1 22

1 1 1 0 1 1 1 23

1 1 1 0 1 1 1 24

1 1 1 0 1 1 1 25

1 1 1 0 1 1 1 26

1 1 1 0 1 1 1 27

1 1 1 0 1 1 1 28

1 1 1 0 1 1 1 29

1 1 1 0 1 1 1 30

1 1 1 0 1 1 1 31

1 1 1 0 1 1 1 32

1 1 1 0 1 1 1 33

1 1 1 0 1 1 1 34

30/30= 100% 30/30= 100% 30/30= 100% 0% 30/30= 100%

28/30

=93%

30/30

=100%

Table J University of Minnesota Archive, <local elements> Section



<local elements>

access

restrict

(MARC

506)

userestrict

(MARC

540)

prefercite

(MARC

524)

Acqinfo

(MARC

541)

processinf

o (MARC

583)

Arrange

ment

(MARC

351)

bioghist

(MARC

545)

other

findingaid

Related

material

(MARC

544)

Collection

#

1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 5

1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 6

1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 7

1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 8

1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 9


1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 10

1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 11

1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 12

1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 13

1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 14

1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 15

1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 16

1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 17

1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 18

1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 19

1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 20

1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 21

1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 22

1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 23

1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 24

1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 25

1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 26

1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 27

1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 28

1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 29

1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 30

1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 31

1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 32

1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 33

1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 34

30/30

=100%

30/30

=100%

30/30

=100%

14/30

= 46% 0 8/30

=26%

26/30

=86%

24/30

=80%

10/30

= 33%


Table K

University of Texas archive: Collection list (n=30) (data begins at #5 due to excel numbering)

University of Texas Library, Alexander Architectural Archive

http://www.lib.utexas.edu/taro/browse/browse_aaa1.html

Collection Reference URL

Blake Alexander: An Inventory… 5 http://www.lib.utexas.edu/taro/utaaa/00051/aaa-00051.html

Joel Warren Barna: An Inventory of his Records 6 http://www.lib.utexas.edu/taro/utaaa/00050/aaa-00050.html

American Planning Association- Texas Chapter: 7 http://www.lib.utexas.edu/taro/utaaa/00035/aaa-00035.html

Bartlett Cocke, An Inventory of his Papers 8 http://www.lib.utexas.edu/taro/utaaa/00055/aaa-00055.html

Colley Associates drawings 9 http://www.lib.utexas.edu/taro/utaaa/00111/aaa-00111.html

Corneil G. Curtis, An Inventory of his Drawings 10 http://www.lib.utexas.edu/taro/utaaa/00094/aaa-00094.html

John Tarleton Agricultural College 11 http://www.lib.utexas.edu/taro/utaaa/00083/aaa-00083.html

California Agricultural collection 12 http://www.lib.utexas.edu/taro/utaaa/00052/aaa-00052.html

New Mexico Architectural collection 13 http://www.lib.utexas.edu/taro/utaaa/00072/aaa-00072.html

Oklahoma Architectural collection 14 http://www.lib.utexas.edu/taro/utaaa/00074/aaa-00074.html

Mexico Architectural collection 15 http://www.lib.utexas.edu/taro/utaaa/00070/aaa-00070.html

Maryland Architectural collection 16 http://www.lib.utexas.edu/taro/utaaa/00068/aaa-00068.html

Connecticut Architectural collection 17 http://www.lib.utexas.edu/taro/utaaa/00025/aaa-00025.html

Colorado Architectural collection 18 http://www.lib.utexas.edu/taro/utaaa/00054/aaa-00054.html

Illinois Architectural collection 19 http://www.lib.utexas.edu/taro/utaaa/00063/aaa-00063.html

Indiana Architectural collection 20 http://www.lib.utexas.edu/taro/utaaa/00090/aaa-00090.html

Kansas Architectural collection 21 http://www.lib.utexas.edu/taro/utaaa/00091/aaa-00091.html

R. M. Williamson 22 http://www.lib.utexas.edu/taro/utaaa/00032/aaa-00032.html

Edward Duke Squibb collection 23 http://www.lib.utexas.edu/taro/utaaa/00100/aaa-00100.html

Greece Architectural collection 24 http://www.lib.utexas.edu/taro/utaaa/00097/aaa-00097.html

Walter T. Rolfe 25 http://www.lib.utexas.edu/taro/utaaa/00039/aaa-00039.html

Petrich-Saur Lumber Company 26 http://www.lib.utexas.edu/taro/utaaa/00079/aaa-00079.html

Wayne Andrews 27 http://www.lib.utexas.edu/taro/utaaa/00061/aaa-00061.html

Robert H. H. Hugman 28 http://www.lib.utexas.edu/taro/utaaa/00027/aaa-00027.html

Wayne Bell papers 29 http://www.lib.utexas.edu/taro/utaaa/00120/aaa-00120.html

H. Dan Heyn 30 http://www.lib.utexas.edu/taro/utaaa/00096/aaa-00096.html

Hugh L. McMath papers 31 http://www.lib.utexas.edu/taro/utaaa/00114/aaa-00114.html

Robert G. Mather papers 32 http://www.lib.utexas.edu/taro/utaaa/00115/aaa-00115.html

Theo S. Maffitt and Theodore S. Mafitt 33 http://www.lib.utexas.edu/taro/utaaa/00067/aaa-00067.html

Philip Creer 34 http://www.lib.utexas.edu/taro/utaaa/00056/aaa-00056.html

Table L University of Texas archive, <eadheader> Section



<eadheader>

Title

(MARC

245) contributor Date address creation revisiondesc language Identifier Collection

#

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 6

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7

1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 8

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 9

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 10

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 11

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 12

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 13

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 14

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 15

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 16

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 17

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 18

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 19

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 20

1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 21

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 22

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 23

1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 24

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 25

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 26

1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 27

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 28

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 29

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 30

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 31

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 32

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 33

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 34

30/30

=100%

30/30=

100%

26/30

=86%

30/30

=100%

30/30

=100% 30/30= 100%

30/30

=100%

30/30

=100%

Table M University of Texas archive, <archdesc> Section



format

(MARC

300)

Repository

(MARC

852)

creator: persname/

corpname (MARC

700,600, 610)

type

(MARC

655)

(description)

scopecontent,

abstract

(MARC 520)

subject

(MARC

650) physloc Collection

#

1 1 1 0 1 0 0 5

1 1 1 0 1 0 0 6

1 1 1 0 1 1 0 7

1 1 1 0 1 0 0 8

1 1 1 1 1 1 0 9

1 1 1 1 1 1 0 10

1 1 1 1 1 1 0 11

1 1 1 0 1 0 0 12

1 1 1 0 1 0 0 13

1 1 1 0 1 0 0 14

1 1 1 0 1 0 0 15

1 1 1 0 1 0 0 16

1 1 1 0 1 0 0 17

1 1 1 0 1 0 0 18

1 1 1 0 1 1 0 19

1 1 1 0 1 0 0 20

1 1 1 0 1 0 0 21

1 1 1 0 1 1 0 22

1 1 1 0 1 0 0 23

1 1 1 1 1 1 0 24

1 1 1 1 1 1 0 25

1 1 1 0 1 0 0 26

1 1 1 0 1 0 0 27

1 1 1 1 1 1 0 28

1 1 1 1 1 1 0 29

1 1 1 1 1 1 0 30

1 1 1 1 1 1 0 31

1 1 1 0 1 0 0 32

1 1 1 0 1 0 0 33

1 1 1 1 1 1 0 34

30/30

= 100%

30/30

=100% 30/30=100%

10/30=

33% 30/30=100%

13/30

= 43%

0/30

=0%

Table N University of Texas Archive, <local elements> Section


<local elements>

Access

restrict

(MARC

506)

userestrict

(MARC 540)

prefercite

(MARC 524)

Acqinfo

(MARC

541)

processin

fo

(MARC58

3)

Arrange

ment

(MARC

351)

bioghist

(MARC

545)

other

finding

aid

Related

material

(MARC

544)

Collection

#

1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 5

1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 6

1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 7

1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 8

1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 9

1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 10

1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 11

1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 12

1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 13

1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 14

1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 15

1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 16

1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 17

1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 18

1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 19

1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 20

1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 21

1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 22

1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 23

1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 24

1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 25

1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 26

1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 27

1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 28

1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 29

1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 30

1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 31

1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 32

1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 33

1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 34

30/30

=100%

30/30

=100%

30/30

=100%

2/30

=6%

30/30

=100%

2/30

=6%

30/30

=100%

5/30

=16%

4/30

=13%

Truncated examples of 2 metadata records: 1. (University of Texas, Alexander Architectural archive, Colley Associates drawings)

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no" ?> <!DOCTYPE ead (View Source for full doctype...)>

- <ead relatedencoding="MARC21">

- <eadheader langencoding="ISO639-2" id="a0" audience="internal" findaidstatus="edited-

full-draft" scriptencoding="iso15924" dateencoding="iso8601"

countryencoding="iso3166-1" repositoryencoding="iso15511"> <eadid mainagencycode="TxU" countrycode="us"

encodinganalog="852$a">urn:taro:utexas.aaa.00111</eadid> - <filedesc>

- <titlestmt>

<titleproper>Colley Associates drawings,</titleproper>

- <subtitle>

<date era="ce" calendar="gregorian">1960s</date>

</subtitle>

</titlestmt>

- <publicationstmt>

<publisher>The University of Texas at Austin. University of Texas Libraries. Alexander

Architectural Archive.</publisher> </publicationstmt>

</filedesc>

- <profiledesc>

- <creation>

Provisional record created by Kathryn A. Pierce using XMetaL 3.0 on

<date era="ce" calendar="gregorian">October 2008.</date>

</creation>

- <langusage>

Finding aid written in

<language>English.</language>

</langusage>

</profiledesc>

</eadheader>

- <archdesc level="collection" type="inventory">

- <did id="a1">

<head>Collection Summary</head>

- <origination label="Creator">

<persname encodinganalog="100">Colley, Richard S., 1910-</persname>

</origination>

<unittitle label="Title" encodinganalog="245">Colley Associates drawings</unittitle>

<unitdate era="ce" calendar="gregorian">1960s</unitdate>

<unitid label="Identification" countrycode="US" repositorycode="AAA"

encodinganalog="099">COLLE Accession number: 2008010</unitid> <physdesc label="Quantity" encodinganalog="300$a">939 sheets of architectural

drawings, 3 black and white photographs, 4 color photographs, 142 photostats, and 1 line negative.</physdesc>

- <repository label="Repository:" encodinganalog="852$a">

- <extref href="http://www.lib.utexas.edu/apl/aaa/" show="new" actuate="onrequest"

linktype="simple"> - <corpname>

<subarea>Alexander Architectural Archive,</subarea>

University of Texas Libraries, The University of Texas at Austin.

</corpname>

</extref>

</repository>

_ _ _ 2. (University of Minnesota Northwest Architectural Archive, Wesley G. Wells papers) <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="naastyle.xsl"?> <!DOCTYPE ead PUBLIC "-//Society of American Archivists//DTD ead.dtd (Encoded Archival Description (EAD) Version 2002)//EN" "ead.dtd"> <ead audience="external"> <eadheader audience="internal" langencoding="iso639-2b" repositoryencoding="iso15511" scriptencoding="iso15924" dateencoding="iso8601" countryencoding="iso3166-1" relatedencoding="Dublin Core"> <eadid countrycode="mnu" mainagencycode="MnU" encodinganalog="Identifier" publicid="-//University of Minnesota, Twin Cities Campus::Manuscripts Division//TEXT us::MnU::naa047.xml::Wesley G. Wells papers , 19//EN">

naa047</eadid> <filedesc> <titlestmt> <titleproper encodinganalog="Title"> Wesley G. Wells papers</titleproper> <author encodinganalog="Contributor">Archives Staff</author> </titlestmt> <publicationstmt> <publisher encodinganalog="Publisher">University of Minnesota Libraries</publisher> <date encodinganalog="Date">undated</date> <address> <addressline>University of Minnesota Libraries</addressline> <addressline>Minneapolis, MN 55455</addressline> </address> </publicationstmt> </filedesc> <profiledesc> <creation>EAD encoding by Karen Spilman, <date>May 2005</date></creation>

<langusage> <language encodinganalog="Language" langcode="eng">English</language></langusage>

</profiledesc> </eadheader> <archdesc level="collection" relatedencoding="MARC21"> <did> <origination> <persname source="lcnaf" rules="aacr2" role="creator"

encodinganalog="100">Wells, Wesley G., 1901- </persname></origination>

<unittitle encodinganalog="245$a" label="Title: ">Wesley G. Wells papers</unittitle> <unitdate normal="1918/1947" encodinganalog="245$f" type="inclusive"

label="Dates: ">1918-1947</unitdate> <repository encodinganalog="852$a" label="Repository: ">University of Minnesota Libraries. <subarea>Northwest Architectural Archives,

Manuscripts Division [naa]</subarea></repository> <physdesc label="Quantity: "> <extent encodinganalog="300"> 3.0 cubic feet </extent></physdesc> <abstract encodinganalog="520" label="Abstract: ">Collection contains

personal papers and drawings and specifications of building designed by Wesley G. Wells. </abstract>

<unitid encodinganalog="099" countrycode="mnu" repositorycode="MnU" label="Collection Number: ">N 47</unitid>

<langmaterial encodinganalog="546" label="Language: "> <language encodinganalog="041" langcode="eng">English</language> </langmaterial> <physloc label="Location: ">Mezzanine; High Bay</physloc> </did> <descgrp> <head>Administrative Information</head>

<accessrestrict encodinganalog="506"> <head>Restrictions on Access</head> Available for use in the Manuscripts Division reading room. Advance notice is requested. </accessrestrict> <userestrict encodinganalog="540"> <head>Restrictions on Use</head> There are no restrictions on the use of materials in this collection. Copies can be requested if the condition of the originals warrants it. </userestrict> <prefercite encodinganalog="524"> <head>Preferred Citation</head> Wesley G. Wells papers (N 47), Northwest Architectural Archives, University of Minnesota Libraries, Minneapolis. </prefercite> <acqinfo encodinganalog="541"> <head>Acquisition</head>

The collection was donated to the Northwest Architectural Archives on June 4, 1977. </acqinfo> </descgrp> <bioghist encodinganalog="545">


References:

Carpenter, B., & Park, J. R.(2009). Encoded archival description (EAD) metadata scheme: An analysis of use of the EAD headers. Journal of Library Metadata, 9, 1, 134-152. Combs, et al. (2010). Report: Over, Under, Around, and Through: Getting Around Barriers to

EAD Implementation. OCLC Report. Retrieved June 1, 2011 from: http://www.oclc.org/research/publications/library/2010/2010-04.pdf Fox, M. J. (March 2004). EAD cookbook: 2002 edition. Retrieved June 2, 2011 from http://www.archivists.org/saagroups/ead/ead2002cookbookhelp.html Library of Congress. (2002a). Development of the Encoded Archival Description DTD, retrieved 5/30/2011 from www.loc.gov/ead/eaddev.html Library of Congress. (2002b). Encoded Archival Description Tag Library, retrieved 5/30/2011 from www.loc.gov/ead/tglib/ Library of Congress. (2002c). EAD Application Guidelines, retrieved 5/30/2011 from http://lcweb.loc.gov/ead/ag/aghome.html Library of Congress. (2006). EAD Design Principles, retrieved 5/30/2011 from http://www.loc.gov/ead/eaddesgn.html Park, J. & Maszaros, S. (2009). Metadata Object Description Schema (MODS) in Digital Repositories: An Exploratory Study of Metadata Use and Quality. Knowledge Organization, 36

(1): 46-59.

Pitti, D. (2005). Technology and the transformation of archival description. Journal of Archival

Organization, 3(2/3), 9-22. Ruth, J.E. (1009). Encoded archival description: A structural overview. American Archivist,

60, 322.

. SAA EAD Working Group. (2002.) EAD tag library. Retrieved June 2, 2011 from http://www.loc.gov/ead/tglib/index.html Society of American Archivists. (2010). What is EAD?, Retrieved June 2, 2011 from: http://www.archivists.org/saagroups/ead/aboutead.html Society of American Archivists & Library of Congress. (1999a) Application guidelines for

version 1.0. Retrieved June 2, 2011 from http://www.loc.gov/ead/ag/aghome.html

Society of American Archivists & Library of Congress. (1999b) EAD Application Guidelines for

Version 1.0, Appendix B: EAD Crosswalks, Retrieved June 2, 2011 from

http://www.loc.gov/ead/ag/agappb.html


University of Oregon, (2005). Subject Access to Digital Collections in CONTENT dm:

Background and Rationale for UO Decisions, retrieved 6/6/2011 from

http://libweb.uoregon.edu/inc/data/catdept/meta/subj_access_background_rev1205.pdf University of Texas Library. (n.d.). ischool tutorials:Introduction to EAD, retrieved 6/1/2011 from: https://tutorials.ischool.utexas.edu/index.php/Introduction_to_EAD Yale University Library. (2008). European History research guide, retrieved 7/1/2011 from http://www.library.yale.edu/rsc/history/european/mss.html

a review of semantic interoperability of ead metadata ... · info 662 dr. park spring 2011 6/8/2011...

Documents