LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.5

Help for CODE4LIB Archives


CODE4LIB Archives

CODE4LIB Archives


CODE4LIB@LISTS.CLIR.ORG


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

CODE4LIB Home

CODE4LIB Home

CODE4LIB  February 2012

CODE4LIB February 2012

Subject:

Re: Metadata

From:

Simon Spero <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Code for Libraries <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Wed, 15 Feb 2012 16:29:39 -0500

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (93 lines)

I have had several theoretical changes of opinion on this question, and
have come to the considered opinion that there is no principled *essential*
difference between Metadata and Data. It all depends on the
context/theory/background assumptions to which the data is being applied.

The property of Data being meta is entirely use sensitive. The property of
being information may depend upon the existence of metadata referring to
the data.

For example, it is labeling of an antelope in a zoo as "an antelope" that
turns an ungulate into a document; data measured from this beast gives us
evidence about what "an antelope" is like.
The label & number of the beast, as well as the date of capture and other
provenance, are clearly metadata in this case, and provide the context for
interpreting the data as information, and for assessing the degree of
justification we have for treating this information as knowledge. However,
in other cases, the metadata may serve as data for other studies, with no
reference to our four legged friend.
Suppose we are doing a study on the rate of differently labeled specimen
acquisition in zoos across Europe over the course of the 19th and 20th
centuries. In this situation, what was metadata has become our primary
data; *our* metadata relates to the provenance of the descriptions.

Metadata embedded by a smart sensor package included in the same persuade
as the data gathered as part of an observation run is essential to the
interpretation of that data as information. However, it is not the primary
data itself; it is the context. Radar data from early JSTARS platforms was
severely downgraded by rain between the platform and the ground; the
information provided needs context about climate conditions in order to
determine the actual amount of information obtained when fusing that
information with other sensor systems. However, the climate readings are
not part of the radar data itself.


So, to sum up, it depends; Further Research Is Needed; one man's Meta is
another man's Poisson.

Simon
On Feb 14, 2012 9:59 AM, "Michael Hopwood" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Having done research, and now working in a very varied metadata role, I
> don't quite understand this discussion about data that is or isn't
> metadata. Scientific data is a great example of structured data, but it's
> not impossible to distinguish it from metadata purely describing a dataset.
>
> However, if you have scientific research data created during the
> experiments, even if it's "operational", it's clearly part of "the" data.
> This doesn't mean there can't be metadata describing *that data*. Just
> because it's not glamorous data doesn't mean it's not essential to the
> scientific process. Similarly, just being about mundane or procedural
> things doesn't make data into metadata...!
>
> You're absolutely right, the contextual information is certainly part of
> the experimental outcome in this example; otherwise it would be abstract
> data such as one might use in a textbook example.
>
> Metadata would describe the dataset itself, not the scientific research.
> There's always a certain ambiguity involved in identifying "the data" as
> distinct from the metadata, and it's a false dichotomy to suggest metadata
> is not useful at all for the domain expert. It's contextual, and the
> definition is always at least partly based on your use case for the data
> and its description.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Code for Libraries [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
> Nate Vack
> Sent: 14 February 2012 14:45
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Metadata
>
> On Tue, Feb 14, 2012 at 1:22 AM, Graham Triggs <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
>
> > That's an interesting distinction though. Do you need all that data in
> > order to make sense of the results? You don't [necessarily] need to
> > know who conducted some research, or when they conducted it in order
> > to analyse and make sense of the data. In the context of having the
> > data, this other information becomes irrelevant in terms of
> > understanding what that data says.
>
> It is *essential* to understanding what the data says. Perhaps you find
> out your sensor was on the fritz during a time period -- you need to be
> able to know what datasets are suspect. Maybe the blood pressure effect
> you're looking at is mediated by circadian rhythms, and hence, times of day.
>
> Not all of your data is necessary in every analysis, but a bunch of blood
> pressure measurements in the absence of contextual information is
> universally useless.
>
> The metadata is part of the data.
>
> -n
>

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTS.CLIR.ORG

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager