New proposal: add a plain text field analogous to isPartOf in GBL 1.0

[karenmajewicz]

Background

We have a continued need for a plain text field to indicate a custom grouping or collection.

• Under GBL 1.0, this was entered in dct_isPartOf_sm as linkable plain text.
• Under OGM Aardvark, the options for this are:
  • Create a separate record to represent the collection. Use the pcdm_memberOf_sm field or dct_isPartOf_sm to establish a relationship
  • Use the uncontrolled dct_subject_sm field for custom values

Options from other schemas

• mri:aggregateDataSetName - from ISO to group datasets
• schema.org/targetCollection - to indicate a collection; the addition of target helps distinguish the URI from the value of collection (The term collection is a value for the Dublin Core Type field as well as the OGM "Resource Class" field.
• schema.org/about - a very general field that can take a subject
• ddi:group - general concept of grouping items.
• ead_subcollection

Suggestions for custom options

• gbl_collection_sm
• gbl_grouping_sm
• ogm_collection_sm
• ogm_subcollection_sm

Considerations

Pluses:

• This would let users more easily search for the values in the catalog
• This would maintain values for anyone still looking to migrate from GBL 1.0

Cons:

• Adding a new field might make things confusing or simply add too many options. We already have a 5 categorization fields:
  • Resource Class: short controlled vocab of top level groupings
  • Resource Type: short controlled vocab of secondary groupings
  • Theme: ISO Topic Categories, with OGM specific spellings
  • Subject: uncontrolled, used for LOC, or ISO variant spellings
  • Keyword: hidden, uncontrolled tags
    We also have several relationship fields: Member Of, Is Part Of, Source
• The label "Collection" would conflict with how Member Of is labeled.

Related issues

#43
OpenGeoMetadata/GeoCombine#143
Geo4LibCamp 24 discussion

[karenmajewicz]

Cornell has already created a custom field for this: cugir_collection_sm

[kgjenkins]

Another advantage is that you could turn this text field into a facet.