> On May 6, 2015, at 7:08 AM, James Morley <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> I think a key thing is to determine to what extent any definition of 'completeness' is actually a representation of 'quality'. As Peter says, making sure not just that metadata is present but then checking it conforms with rules is a big step towards this.
Basing quality measures too much on the presence of certain data points or the volume of data is fraught with peril. In experiments in the distant past, my experience was that looking for structure and syntax patterns that indicate good/bad quality as well as considering record sources was useful. Also keep in mind that any scoring system is to some extent arbitrary, so you don't want to read more into what it generates than appropriate.