Steve Hitchcock
Wed, 14 Jul 2010 01:42:08 -0700
Swithun, Interesting effect of using multiple format ID tools in a bundled arrangement such as FITS. Presumably we have to understand and rectify the inconsistencies rather than just record them. What degree of disagreement have you found? Steve On 12 Jul 2010, at 10:44, Swithun Crowe wrote: > Hello > > I'm looking at using PREMIS (http://www.loc.gov/standards/premis/) as the > technical metadata vocabulary for an archiving project. I plan to use FITS > (http://code.google.com/p/fits/) as the tool to generate technical metadata, > and then transform the output to PREMIS with XSLT. > > FITS uses various tools for generating metadata (JHove, DROID, NLNZ metadata > extractor, Exif tool etc.). Sometimes these tools disagree with each other, > or they produce conflicting or uncertain results, or only one tool can > provide a piece of information. FITS outputs these conflicts and levels of > certainty. > > But I am unsure of how to translate this into PREMIS. An attribute > @certainty, say, would be nice. But the schema wouldn't allow it. Has anyone > found a way round this? > > Would repeating elements like 'format' be a good solution to conflicting > format identifications? > > Swithun. > > -- > The University of St Andrews is a charity registered in Scotland: SC013532 Steve Hitchcock KeepIt Project Manager IAM Group, Building 32 School of Electronics and Computer Science University of Southampton, SO17 1BJ, UK Email: sh...@ecs.soton.ac.uk Tel: +44 (0)23 8059 7698 Fax: +44 (0)23 8059 2865 http://preservation.eprints.org/keepit/ Blog: http://blogs.ecs.soton.ac.uk/keepit/ Twitter: http://twitter.com/jisckeepit Slideshare: http://www.slideshare.net/SteveHitchcock KeepIt course http://bit.ly/7PRDhq Twitter #dprc http://twapperkeeper.com/dprc/