LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for METS Archives


METS Archives

METS Archives


METS@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Monospaced Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

METS Home

METS Home

METS  May 2002

METS May 2002

Subject:

Questions about audio modeling in METS (long)

From:

Robin Wendler <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

[log in to unmask]

Date:

Thu, 16 May 2002 15:40:23 -0400

Content-Type:

TEXT/PLAIN

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

TEXT/PLAIN (81 lines)

At Harvard we are trying to use METS to archive the audio preservation and
production process our music library is engaged in. We will not drive
delivery from these METS files, but instead will use persistent
identifiers pointing to deliverable audio segments from EAD finding aids.
The METS files are being designed to aid preservation and future
processing operations. Our current thinking about how to use METS for this
need is described below, and we'd welcome input.

Our process currently reformats an original audio item such as a tape or
record in 3 resolutions: a 96kHz/24 bit preservation master, a 44.1kHz/16
bit production master and a real audio file/.smil playlist. Any of these
resolutions may consist of a single file, of several files meant to be
played in parallel, e.g. left channel and right channel each in their own
file (hereafter referred to as a file_group), or several files or
file_groups strung together by an edit decision list that defines which
part(s) of which file(s) to play when.

Since all 3 resolutions represent the same intellectual content, we would
like to maintain a relationship between them that allows us to know that a
song or performance begins at such and such a time, no matter which
resolution we are dealing with. In other words, song 1 starts at 1 minute
in all 3 resolutions, not 1 minute in the first, 1:10 in the second and
zero in the third. Also worth noting is the fact that many of these source
audio objects are multi-track in nature. Some tapes are 2 track mono,
meaning you play one track, them flip the tape and play the other. Some
are 1/4 track stereo, and so on. Additionally we want to preserve digiprov
information that includes some files that are used during the production
processes. These include project files, parameter settings for de-noising,
waveform reduction files, etc.

We currently are considering using the METS structMap to define the
hierarchy of the resolutions, preservation master, production master and
deliverable. However, we have found it difficult to represent the full
complexity of multi-file audio across multiple resolutions using the METS
structMap alone. Therefore, when any of these versions is more complicated
than a single audio file, we are proposing to point from the structMap to
an Audio Decision List as defined by the AES31-3-1999 Standard, "AES
standard for network and file transfer and exchange-Part 3:Simple project
interchange."

We would construct these ADLs so that the content started at the same time
index in each case so that the time line for each ADL would be identical
to the others in the METS document. In many cases, some audio information
is omitted from one of the versions, e.g. the deliverable may not always
contain everything that is present in the preservation master due to
copyright issues or lack of interest. In those situations, the audio
portions that are present will be aligned in their ADL to the correct time
relative to the master and silence will be inserted to fill the gaps, thus
preserving the program/time relationships between versions. We believe
this provides a simpler and clearer way to associate deliverable and
production segments with the appropriate sections of the preservation
master than anything we have been able to model using the structMap alone.

Each ADL will have as many tracks as the original audio object. They will
each correspond in a 1: 1 fashion to the original item. Thus we are
essentially modeling the original object with the ADL, and using the METS
structMap to associate different versions of that object. We will keep
track of audio file metadata using the AES core audio schema in METS
techMD and sourceMD as appropriate. Each audio file will point to its own
core audio metadata from its entry in the METS filegroup. Parameter files
and other auxiliary data will also be packaged as metadata. The AES
process history schema will describe digiprov metadata that show how to
get from the preservation master to the production master and how to get
from production master to delivery copy. This will also be linked from the
file group entries. The AES process history metadata will provide the
links to the auxiliary processing files packaged in other metadata
buckets.

Our use of METS in this particular case is intended for internal use only,
but we would be interested in reactions and suggestions from other METS
audio implementers, particularly from anyone who has been able to model
complex relationships among audio files entirely within the METS
structMap.

-- Robin Wendler (1/4) and David Ackerman (3/4 -- the clear parts)

Robin Wendler ........................ work (617) 495-3724
Office for Information Systems ....... fax (617) 495-0491
Harvard University Library ........... [log in to unmask]
Cambridge, MA, USA 02138 .............

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

November 2022
December 2021
November 2021
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
July 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
July 2018
June 2018
April 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
January 2017
October 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
January 2016
September 2015
August 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
January 2014
December 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
February 2013
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
June 2012
May 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
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
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
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager