discuss: metadata management; required and desired elements? [oh, and tooling]


Previous by date: 30 Mar 2016 19:16:54 +0100 Re: Fully automatic publishing! http://www.tldp.org/en/ (thanks to Serge), Jason S. Evans
Next by date: 30 Mar 2016 19:16:54 +0100 updated plan of action for TLDP improvement(s), Martin A. Brown
Previous in thread:
Next in thread:

Subject: metadata management; required and desired elements? [oh, and tooling]
From: "Martin A. Brown" ####@####.####
Date: 30 Mar 2016 19:16:54 +0100
Message-Id: <alpine.LSU.2.11.1603301113250.21759@znpeba.jbaqresebt.arg>

Hello all,

I have been thinking about the metadata question.  Instead of laying 
the focus on the tool(s) that we might use to manage metadata, I 
thought I'd ask the question.... What metadata do we want to be able 
to support.  Once we know what the metadata are, then we can figure 
out what tool (or tools) may help us reach the goal.

I have collected the ideas that I have seen on this list, as well as 
adding some of my own thoughts.

If anybody has any thoughts about metadata we should (or should not 
include) or tooling  that we should consider (or not consider), I'd 
be interested.

-Martin


Metadata management for TLDP
============================
This is a description of the metadata we wish to manage for each document in
our collection.

Required elements
-----------------
  * title; a clear, descriptive title
  * stem; probably the title with dashes instead of spaces
  * author(s); main author or contact should be first
  * license; each document must have a license
  * last update; the date of the last update to the content

Desired elements
----------------
There are varying degrees of 'optional', but these seem to be the 
core desired elements:

  * abstract
     - a paragraph (teaser) describing the content and scope of the material

  * review history
     - DocBook <revhistory/> serves this purpose
     - Asciidoc supports revision history
     - Linuxdoc; convention seems to be to use SGML comments in the header

  * reviewer(s)
     - perhaps a part of review history?

  * document status:
     - proposed / in-progress
     - under review
     - published / active
     - published / seeking new author
     - abandoned
     - retired

  * topic tags [we could use a good source ontology]
     - hardware
     - networking
     - desktop
     - application
     - community
     -  ...

  * target (or level)
     - introductory material / novice
     - Linux user
     - system administrator
     - software developer

How to present and manage metadata
----------------------------------

It would be nice to be able to look through a list of documents sorted by status, topic.
The closest thing we have now is.  That would not be easy to keep completely
up to date.

  http://wiki.tldp.org/Page_Status



--
Martin A. Brown http://linux-ip.net/

Previous by date: 30 Mar 2016 19:16:54 +0100 Re: Fully automatic publishing! http://www.tldp.org/en/ (thanks to Serge), Jason S. Evans
Next by date: 30 Mar 2016 19:16:54 +0100 updated plan of action for TLDP improvement(s), Martin A. Brown
Previous in thread:
Next in thread:


  ©The Linux Documentation Project, 2014. Listserver maintained by dr Serge Victor on ibiblio.org servers. See current spam statz.