This document summarizes the Improving Description through Collaboration project between Indiana University and University of Michigan to create a controlled vocabulary for annotating and providing access to ethnomusicological video collections. The project aims to develop tools for annotation, controlled vocabulary management, and end-user access. Researchers and librarians collaborated in developing a framework and workflow for creating and applying the controlled vocabulary during the annotation process. The vocabulary will improve descriptive consistency, search, and integration with library catalogs.
Improving Description through Collaboration: The Ethnomusicological Video for Instruction & Analysis Digital Archive
1. Improving Description through Collaboration:
The Ethnomusicological Video for
Instruction & Analysis Digital Archive
Music Library Association, February 25, 2006
Jenn Riley, Suzanne Mudge
3. Software Developed
• Annotation tool
–
–
–
–
Collection introduction
Collector’s biography
Annotation with free text and CV
Video divided into events, scenes, and actions
• Controlled vocabulary maintenance tool
• End-user access tool
4. EVIA Digital Archive
Institutional Participants
Indiana
University
Archives of
Traditional
Music
Digital
Library
Program
Mellon Foundation
Folklore &
Ethnomusicology
Dept
Digital
Media
Network
Services
SAVAIL
University
of
Michigan
Ethnomusicology
Program
University
IT
Services
Digital Asset
Management
Initiative
Media
Center
5. Archives of Traditional Music
• Serves as the repository for each EVIA-DA
(ethnomusicologist’s) collection
• An ATM/EVIADA collection consists of
digital betacam (digibeta) preservation
copies
• Catalogs each depositor’s collection on
OCLC and IUCAT, IU’s online catalog
6. IU Digital Library Program
• Technological “home” for content,
metadata, and system development
• Expertise in delivering collections online
• Perspective on interoperability with other
digital library initiatives
• Bridge between technologists and librarians
8. Controlled Vocabulary
• CV function in the project
• Demonstrate collaborative process
• Demonstrate results of successful
collaboration
9. CV Function
• Annotation process: “Annotation Toolbox”
– Identify important descriptive elements (indexing)
– Descriptive consistency
• EVIA-DA Website interface
– Search and browse
– Establishes a relationship with online catalog
• Online catalog
– Standard access component
– Integration with other library materials
12. CV Framework
• Three areas:
– Ethnomusicologists at IU & UM
– Librarians at ATM & DLP
– Technologists at DLP
• Two overlapping teams:
– Technology IU & UM
– Research & Pedagogy
13. Build Relationships
• Planning Phase: 2001-2003
– 3 Workshops as central component
– Develop initial plans & workflow
• Development Phase: 2003-2006
– Refine plans & workflow
– Summer Institute testing
14. Build on What We Know
• Researchers
– Subject expertise
• Catalogers
– Experience with description and access creating MARC
bibliographic records
• Metadata librarians
– Metadata issues, knowledge of source vocabularies
• DLP
– Past projects, metadata, need for CV
15. Researchers & CV
• Preparation
– Determine CV categories: geography, culture/group,
language, genre/performance type, instrument, venue
– Work with their own collections, begin process of
description through ATM Collection Summary Form
(handout 1)
• Annotation
– Create brief and detailed annotations at multiple levels
of their video
– Assign CV terms to video at multiple levels
16. Catalogers & CV
• Preparation
– Create preliminary MARC records (handout 2)
– Relate content, description from bibliographic records
for collections (particularly LCSH) to proposed CV
categories (handout 3)
– Use vocabulary in bibliographic record to create the
initial CV terms used in the annotation process
• Annotation
– Work with researchers to select and refine terms
– Began research for SACO proposals
17. SACO Proposals
• Began as exchange among catalogers and
researchers
– When no LCSH term existed or was adequate
– When the catalogers felt the terms followed an LCSH
pattern
– When the catalogers or researchers felt the reference
resources would support new term
• Began to make proposals after Summer Institute I
• Examples of accepted proposals (handout 4)
18. Metadata librarian/DLP & CV
• Preparation
– Help determine source vocabularies (handout 5)
– Develop application to manage vocabularies
– Planned encoding of annotation in MODS XML format
• Annotation
– On hand to assist with annotation application
– Planned for future application enhancements
19. Collaboratively Plan & Test
• Workflow for CV
–
–
–
–
–
Researchers & catalogers set up CV categories (handout 5)
Technologists incorporate categories in annotation tool
Researchers complete collection summary forms (handout 1)
Catalogers begin MARC bibliographic records (handout 2)
Terms and headings from bibliographic records are transferred to
CV thesaurus via technologists’ maintenance tool
• Summer Institute
– Test CV workflow as part of annotation process
– Test software applications
– Begin research for SACO proposals (handout 4)
The EVIA-Digital Archive project is a joint effort of Indiana University and the University of Michigan to establish a digital archive of ethnomusicological video for use by scholars, instructors and students. The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, Indiana University, and the University of Michigan are funding the project, which is now in its final stage of development.
All of the project goals listed here support the establishment of an online repository and delivery system that preserves digital copies of ethnomusicological field videos, simultaneously displays video segments and free text annotations, and provides a search and browse user interface on the project's website.
A hallmark of the project has been the collaborative effort needed to accomplish each project goal. The focus for this presentation is the controlled vocabulary component. Other goals, in blue will be mentioned as they relate to the development of the project's CV thesaurus.
We built an annotation interface.
I'll briefly review the function of CV in the project then discuss the collaborative process. Jenn will demonstrate several of the specific results of this collaboration.
CV helps researchers talk among themselves regarding central points…
This slide shows how it functions today in the project and how it improves the process and over all description
Will show how we got here…
“Ultimate purpose: to standardize spelling and usage of terms for describing ethno. Field video 2) to provide a robust searchable database for end-users” from interim develop. phase proposal
Rose out of annotation process and the need to ID important descriptive elements
Content Description & Annotation:
Collection introduction
Collector’s biography
Annotation-- includes free text and CV
CV for different levels of video-- event, scenes, actions
• To have a successful collaborative project we needed to: Develop a fluid framework…, etc.
• Build relations: project collaboration made possible with the opportunity through workshops and institute(s)
• Build on what we know: Each of the three areas contributing to CV
• Collaborative development and testing (combination of the three areas)
= Actions we took after workshops and during development phase = pre-test CV workflow, and project workflow and testing at the first summer Institute
Maybe put this in the results section
• Collaboration led to things not feasible before = tools, SACO as examples OR say
• Further developed expertise, with SACO as an example
The collaborative framework for CV development covered the three areas mentioned earlier-- representatives from the three areas worked on two EVIA-DA teams to plan the workflow, content and tools for development of CV component
Note fluidity since personnel shifts from R&P, to tech.
Have text for this pretty well worked out…
Quick slide to summarize what each group provided.
Categories based on what kinds of things people/users will want to search for: (from 12 to 6)
R&P learned about ethnomusicology assumptions– they don’t like being nailed down– don’t like categorizing
HANDOUT 1: Collection summary sheet
Annotation helped them build on what they know and develop better understanding of CV
HANDOUT 2: preliminary MARC bib-- relate to summary form
HANDOUT 3: CV to MARC chart-- creating relationships from what I know to researchers’ categories
This is easy…
HANDOUT 4: showing categories and vocabularies (metadata and ATM librarians collaborated on chart)
Try to make this in sync with previous 2 slides-- Ask Jenn for help, esp. with “Annotation” section
Refer back to CV categories handouts or final choices…
Refer back to summary sheet handout (handout 1), MARC example (handout 2)
Mention how catalogers assisted annotators/researchers (presentations and during annotations)
add screenshots here…
Thanks to Alan Burdette, [title], Sunni Fass, [title] for EVIADA slide template
Great project team
Project URL
Email contact