Thanks for the kind words, Nancy! I think a little nook on the LC
website devoted to Best Practise Guides or any documentation
detailing actual implementation of METS would be extremely helpful to
everybody involved, and I'd certainly be happy to contribute anything
that come out of the OAC Subcommittee.

As far as implementation goes, I think the main challenge for us
right now is to figure out which extension schemas to use. Since the
OAC has quite some legacy MOA2 data, I think the first baby-step step
towards implementing METS could be to just try to make METS do what
MOA2 did. However, already just to take that small step we need to
extend METS at the very least with an Admin Metadata schema /dtd (in
particular technical md and rights). Since the OAC is also planning
to use METS as a discovery tool for records which have multimedia
surrogates (as opposed to the many records which don't), we'll also
have to extend with a Descriptive Metadata schema / dtd right off the

Thinking about those issues, I read Jerome's post on extension
schema's with great interest. Heck, I'll confess, I read *all* of
Jerome's posts with great interest :-) He doesn't mention any
descriptive md (probably because nobody is going back to the drawing
board for that one) - I'd still be very interested to hear what
implementors are planning to use at this point. Furthermore I'm
wondering whether the Technical MD for Still Images out of Michigan
is based on the NISO draft standard? Could somebody confirm my hunch?
And last but not least here's the absolutely impossible question: Is
there any (tentative) timeline on when a first set of extension
schemas would be released and approved / recommended by the editorial


At 9:29 AM -0800 3/22/2002, Nancy Hoebelheinrich wrote:
>Hi, Guenter, et al:
>Don't know if you can hear the standing ovation from down here on the Farm
>about the idea of sharing best practice guidelines as they are being
>developed by METS implementers.   We here at Stanford are planning to use
>METS in an OAIS implementation as well, certainly for the SIPs & DIPs, and
>probably also for the AIPs.   We would certainly be willing to share our own
>practices as we make them up & find out what works, and would be quite eager
>to learn from others as well.  Such guidelines would go a long way to
>providing some documentation for the _operational_ aspects of applying METS
>which could distribute that workload, and provide many different
>perspectives on how METS could be used.  (NOT implying anything about the
>existing documentation associated with the schema, Jerry, I'm in awe!)
>Such Best Practice Guidelines would be helpful not only for the
>implementors, but also for the digital creators among our colleagues who are
>worried about how & where the metadata that is or has been created for their
>collections will be used & seen by searchers of the digital repository.  For
>many people, METS represents a paradigm shift that is different,  exciting,
>puzzling, I've found (and certainly it is for me as well as I'm learning how
>to apply it).
>So, how to do this?  We certainly have the mechanisms for sharing
>information by virtue of our LC sponsored web site.  Perhaps in addition to
>certain groups working on extension schema, others among us might work on
>how to document Best Practice Guidelines?  I'd be happy to volunteer to work
>with Guenter and/or others on this if the METS community thought this might
>be useful.
>Nancy Hoebelheinrich
>Metadata Unit Coordinator, Cat Dept
>3rd Floor, Meyer Libr
>Stanford Univ Librs/Acad Info Rsrcs
>Stanford CA    94305-6004
>phone: 650.725.6843  fax: 650.725.1120
>[log in to unmask]
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Metadata Encoding and Transmission Standard
>[mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Guenter Waibel
>Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 9:20 AM
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: [METS] fledgling METS Best Practise?
>Greetings METS list,
>I was jolted out of my convenient state as a lurker on the list by
>MacKenzie's sideline about a standard METS implementation in an OAIS
>At 8:50 PM -0500 3/6/2002, MacKenzie Smith wrote:
>>Not that this tells you much, since we (the
>>METS community)
>>haven't yet defined a standard implementation of METS in the OAIS
>>something I hope we tackle soon...
>The Online Archive of California will adopt METS as an SIP, AIP and
>DIP as soon as it has passed DLF review. Since the OAC has made
>extensive use of MOA2, there already is quite some expertise in
>METS-like objects in the OAC and among its contributors. I am the
>chair of the OAC Digital Object Subcommittee, which has been charged
>with developing Best Practise Guidelines for the implementation of
>METS in the OAC as well as conversion of MOA2 objects into METS. I'd
>be extremely interested in hearing from other early implementors who
>have started to grapple with METS on an institutional scale. Are
>there already any fledgling best practise documents? Any other
>committees being convened elsewhere with a similar goal? I know
>everybody (including me!) is always very hesitant to share their
>imperfect works-in-progress, but maybe letting our pride rest for a
>minute would get us further in this case :-).
>Guenter Waibel
>Berkeley Art Museum & Pacific Film Archive
>Digital Media Developer
>Digital Imaging SIG Chair, MCN
>[log in to unmask]
>Phone   510-643-8655
>Fax     510-642-4889

Guenter Waibel
Berkeley Art Museum & Pacific Film Archive
Digital Media Developer
Digital Imaging SIG Chair, MCN
[log in to unmask]
Phone   510-643-8655
Fax     510-642-4889