Including Creative Works in your Repository Thursday, 28 March 2013

Wednesday 29 April 2009 2-3pm

1 Welcome

  • Katy Watson, CAIRSS Project Manager welcomed all teleconference participants.

  • There were 40 participant groups for the teleconference, including: representatives from the following 35 CAUL Institutions; invited guest Ann Huthwaite (QUT); invited guest Natasha Simons (NLA); and CAIRSS Central staff.

    Australian Catholic University

    Australian National University

    Charles Darwin University

    Charles Sturt University


    Curtin University of Technology

    Deakin University

    Flinders University

    Griffith University

    James Cook University

    LaTrobe University

    Macquarie University

    Monash University

    Murdoch University

    Queensland University of Technology

    RMIT University

    Southern Cross University

    Swinburne University of Technology

    University of Adelaide

    University of Ballarat

    University of Melbourne

    University of Newcastle

    University of New England

    University of New South Wales

    University of Notre Dame

    University of Queensland

    University of South Australia

    University of Southern Queensland

    University of the Sunshine Coast

    University of Sydney

    University of Tasmania

    University of Western Australia

    University of Western Sydney

    University of Wollongong

    Victoria University

2 ERA Submission Guidelines

3 Creative Works Metadata in Repositories

  • General discussion on the issues surrounding what metadata to use for creative works in repositories.

  • Discussion on the importance of selecting the most suitable resource type for creative works. The decision needs to be made on a structure and content model approach, what is best for repository organisation overall, and not just creating ad-hoc resource types.

  • DCMI needs to be taken into account ( There is some concern amongst some repository managers in using the ERA creative works resource types as is, without separating the metadata into finer granular resource types.

  • It was noted that the MACAR resource types ( do not fit completely with DCMI content models (

  • It was noted institutions with self-deposit need to make it as easy as possible for the researcher to describe their creative work. Some felt researchers would not be able to understand the MACAR categories to describe their work.

  • Patricia Scott (Deakin University) provided examples of creative work metadata at Deakin University Repository Deakin Research Online ( Their metadata was developed thinking about what people would use to search. Attribute types are included in categories using MODS, meaning they are able to include ERA attributes for each resource type. This way, the overall structure is related to the type of format people are expecting, with ERA attributes included using genre type metadata.

  • Paula Callan (Queensland University of Technology) provided a QUT draft of creative works metadata for discussion. Paula discussed a single new resource type for all creative works (QUT Creative Works Draft) based on the JISC-funded Kultur Project in the UK ( This outlines various metadata elements used to describe creative works.

  • While decisions will be made driven by local environment, repository managers must consider consistency across institutions and take into account the flow-on impacts such as normalising data for harvesting.

  • Natasha Simons (National Library of Australia) led a discussion on the issues to consider in relation to harvesting (and the related normalising of data). Would like to see some uniformity. There was some concern as to how repositories will use the dc.relation field and how this will impact on harvesting. It was noted the NLA do not currently display dc.format, and may in the future need to expand on the current 8 categories displayed.

  • There are different ingest models. Some repositories are capturing the creative work metadata, either by self-submission or mediated entry, while other institutions are collecting the metadata in their research systems and then feeding the data through to their repositories for evidence.

3.1 Further Discussion

3.1.1 Which way are you considering ?

  1. Using the ERA resource types?

  2. Using a single Creative Work resource type?

  3. Using an overall structure related to the type of format people are expecting, with ERA attributes included using genre type metadata?

  4. MACAR resource types?

  5. Creating resource types based on DCMI?

  6. Other?

3.1.2 Are you able to share your draft creative works metadata templates with the group?

Please email to Katy at CAIRSS and she can distribute.

3.1.3 What other issues do we need to be considering?

4 Storing Creative Works RODA in Repositories

  • Discussion of ERA Submission Guidelines related to this topic.
    section 6.2 p.44. Managing Physical or Technical Limitations

  • Size limits -15MB

  • Is streaming acceptable? Andrew from Monash has asked ARC and will fwd their yes response to the CAIRSS elist.

  • Scanning whole books or making books available on request?
    Some institutions are borrowing from the library collection and will loan to ARC as required.
    Some institutions have identified a copy of books at NLA for those not in the library collection.
    Some institutions buying spare copies of books, as not sure if ARC will return the books.
    Many institutions putting an availability note in the repository metadata requesting ARC contact repository manager for fulltext book to be sent.
    No institutions mentioned they were planning on scanning whole books.

  • What documentation will be provided for books in repositories? Most repository managers who spoke up were not going to make verso and title page available in the repository for ERA (just metadata), although some were already doing this for OA purposes.

5 Linking to Creative Works in Repositories

  • Discussion of ERA Technical Specifications related to this topic.

  • Duncan Dickinson (University of Southern Queensland) led a discussion on the issues related to providing multiple RODA locations to SEER in a worthwhile format. Katy from CAIRSS will forward Duncans email on this topic to the elist for further detail.
    If the RODA need to be dark/authenticated access, how do you provide context? The SEER schema does not appear to allow this, only allowing to note if the link is to a RODA or metadata page.

  • Separate dark repositories. Some institutions stated they are using a second, separate dark repository for ERA.

  • How are institutions linking their creative work research statements? Some institutions are making these open while others are closing these off to ERA authentication. This may alter the way researchers write them.