Here is my two cents:
I believe that instead of developing a Regional Metadata Standard, we should, as a Region, decide upon the use of an existing Standard
and what would be the minimum fields that would be required. No use in re-inventing the wheel in my humble opinion.
Once we have all, as a Region, defined which existing standard to use (ISO 19115?), we should then put this agreement
down in writing and have the representatives for the National SDI of the country sign off on using and enforcing the use of said
Can you share what Jamaica has agreed upon? I remember you mentioning this or Dr. Edwards, but I wanted to look at it. Next week in Puerto Rico, the U.S. Caribbean Regional Ocean Partnership data managers are meeting. My colleague is presenting on data management. Metadata is a component of that presentation.
- Do you think we need a Regional Metadata Standard in the Caribbean?
I think we can use ISO (or pieces of it)
- What do you think would facilitate the introduction of Regional Metadata Standard?
I don't know much about what facilitates standards other than regulations, laws, or wide reaching consensus or practice. However, I think the bigger issue is that metadata is never completed. I don't think having a standard in place will ensure metadata is considered. In my opinion, something else needs to happen there. If all metadata is filled out and its not able to transferred to different formats or people are inconsistent with the metadata they fill out, then a standard will be important. I just don't see that being the case in my experience.
Thanks for your input. I think Jamaica adopted the ISO 19115. I found this online: http://www.licj.org.jm/licj/documents/metadata/metadata_guidelines.pdf.
It may help.
I also agree with you. As GIS practitioners we need to find a way to instill the importance of metadata into our colleagues mindset. It needs to be a mandatory phase in our workflows. I think if it's importance is emphasized, understood and embraced, we may not necessarily need a regional standard.
The 6 fields mentioned by Biswha is a good place to start.
Based on my experience, metadata is best served if it is simple enough to fill out. The 6 or 7 fields suggested by me could be the starting point. As a region when we move forward, we should/could add more fields when there are enough experience with data and metadata.
Another important activity could be a stand alone metadata collection application. There might be an existing Open Source solution.
I agree that building capacity to prepare/document metadata is important. This needs to be a focus in our countries. We need to adopt standards yes, but most important we need to understand the value of metadata and develop/adopt workflows for its documentation.
With respect to standards, they are there, they exist. We need to adopt or develop a profile.
Over the years some of us in Belize have looked at both the Latin American profile and the North American profile. both can serve us but our NSDI Policy states that we will adopt the North American Profile. Since Belize is English speaking it was more convenient to use a profile documented in English. Within the profile we need to Identify the minimum fields to be compliant for our context.
It will be difficult for us to go from no metadata to fully compliant metadata, so we need to put in place a process to develop metadata documentation skills and an approach to expanding the number of minimum fields over time...