The document discusses the role of metadata in information organization within libraries, highlighting its context, searchability, and management capabilities. It criticizes contemporary metadata approaches for not adequately capturing the semantic aspects of information objects and points to the importance of user-driven, socially-constructed metadata. The study emphasizes the need for theoretical frameworks and includes findings from interviews with various library professionals to explore metadata interoperability and related challenges.

1. Getaneh Alemu (PhD)
October 2015

2.  ‘Data about data’
 Describes and locates information objects
 Provides context
 Enables the search-ability, browse-ability, find-ability and
management of information objects
 “The invisible hand” that enables effective information
organisation
 Metadata constitutes a central part of library functions
(Alemu, Stevens, Ross, & Chandler, 2012; Anderson, Delve, Pinchbeck, & Alemu, 2009; Day, 2001; Gartner,
2008; Lagoze, 2010; Nilsson, 2010; NISO, 2004; OCLC/RLG, 2001; Zeng & Qin, 2008)

3.  As library grow, of information
increases, changes and users’ expectations
change:
 Contemporary standards-based metadata approaches fail to
to adequately describe the semantic aspects of
information objects
 The of documents is missing (Otlet, 1934)
“In Otlet’s world each user would leave an imprint, a trail, which would
become part of the explicit history of each document” (Wright , 2007, p.190)
 Scant use of theories/theoretical frameworks in the inclusion
of socially-constructed metadata
(Coyle, 2010; Coyle & Hillmann, 2007; Lagoze, 2010; Mathes, 2004; Shirky, 2005;
Veltman, 2001; Weinberger, 2005, 2007; Wright, 2007)
(Lehmann, 2010; Andersen & Skouvig, 2006.; Floridi, 2000; Hjorland, 2000)

4. Developing a
Exploring the inclusion of
approaches
Inductively identify concepts
Identify principles
Develop framework

5.  Standards-based metadata approaches imply an
philosophical perspective
 Web 2.0 (socially-constructed) metadata approaches seem to
follow a philosophical perspective
 Cultural artefacts very often lend themselves to various
and contexts
Alemu, G., Stevens, B., Ross, P. (2012) Towards a conceptual framework for user-driven semantic metadata
interoperability in digital libraries: A social constructivist approach. New Library World. 113 (1/2), 38-54

6. : inductively developing
concepts/principles/theoretical framework/theories
 Theory rather than theory testing
 Simultaneous data collection and analysis
 Fitting for research areas
 Three approaches to grounded theory method
 Glaserian (Glaser & Strauss, 1967)
 Straussian (Strauss & Corbin, 1998)
(Charmaz, 2006)
Alemu, G., B. Stevens, P. Ross. (2012) Semantic metadata interoperability in digital libraries: a constructivist
grounded theory approach. Bulletin of IEEE Technical Committee on Digital Libraries. 8(1).

7.  Open-ended
 Exploratory
 11 in-depth interviews
 Library as a place
 Obsolescence of OPAC
 Standards-based versus
socially-constructed
metadata approaches
 Sluggish adoption of
Semantic Web
technologies
 Bridging cultural
differences through
metadata
 Collaboration and
metadata crowd sourcing
 The need for theoretical
foundations

11. Study No.
Interviewees
Study Total Number Profession Sub-total
Study One 11
LIS MSc Students 8
LIS PhD Student 1
LIS Lecturers 2
Study Two
21
Librarians 10
LIS Researchers 5
LIS Lecturers 2
Metadata
Consultants
4
Study Three 25
Under-graduate Students (BSC) 5
Post-graduate Students (MSc=4 & PhD=6) 10
Lecturers (other than LIS) 10
Total 57

12. Institution Number of
Interviewees
The British Library 3
Library of Congress 1
Harvard University 1
University of Portsmouth 3
University of Loughborough 1
Kings College London 1
University of South Australia 1
University of Bologna 1
University of Parma 1
University of Zimbabwe 1
University of North Texas 1
Queensland University of Technology 1
OCLC Online Computer Library Centre 1
University College London 1
Cloud of Data 1
2 consultants who are not affiliated to any organisation 2

27.  Reducing barriers to contribution
 Simplicity, interestingness and fun
 Re-findability
 Sense of ownership
 Own vocabularies
 Altruism and reputation
 Engaging with users

31. of users through
 Enables to match the growing collections with the assignment
of
 Metadata and (reflecting user
interpretations/terminologies/better conforming to
user requirements)
complement to the
of
 Metadata should be about the interface not
about the

32.  Granularly metadata
 Uniquely metadata
 Creating and facilitating links
 It brings
 It widens opportunities for

33.  Institutional and
 Facilitates metadata and
 Minimises or
 Flexible and open schemes

34. filtering
 Flexibility to and customise interface displays
catalogue views based on
 navigation

36.  From metadata to metadata ;
 From metadata to a where
augments expert-created metadata;
 From and to
( );
 From metadata to metadata;
 From metadata records to metadata ;
 From a (global) OPAC interface to
and user-friendly interfaces;
 From to through tag
clouding, metadata zeitgeist and faceted navigation.

37.  Methodological contribution
 A and
 Contribution to LIS field/metadata
 Emerging metadata principles
 A theoretical
 Inclusion of the of metadata through a
approach, partly addressing Otlet’s 1934 vision
of contemporary metadata
assumptions and principles
 Better reflects the (linguistic/cultural)
 It is argued that the findings well with the data; are , ‘
and interpretations but it is among other possible .