Re: Data Elements for Image Collections

Joanne Langston (mailto:langstonj@MAIL.FWS.GOV)
Mon, 1 Aug 1994 21:12:15 MST

Message-Id: <mailto:199408020318.WAA25159@library.wustl.edu>
Date:         Mon, 1 Aug 1994 21:12:15 MST
From: Joanne Langston <mailto:langstonj@MAIL.FWS.GOV>
Subject:      Re: Data Elements for Image Collections
To: Multiple recipients of list IMAGELIB <mailto:IMAGELIB@ARIZVM1.BITNET>

     I'm responding generally to the issues raised by Linda McRae
     yesterday, and especially to the need for discipline-specific thesauri
     for imagebases.

Judy Buys and I are the librarians at the National Biological Survey in Lafayette, Louisiana. We have been doing a great deal of preliminary concept work for descriptive cataloging in order to put together an Imagebase of our research center's 10,000 plus and rapidly growing slide/photographic/digital collection of basically ecological/biological/botanical/spatial analysis/aerial photography etc. types of images. Until recently our primary research mission was the study of wetland habitats and migratory waterfowl, and national in scope. Our mission has been broadened to ecosystem/ecoregion coverage and narrowed to the southern part of the US and the flyways that cross the Gulf and Caribbean

We too have assumed that LCSH would need to be augmented by thesauri to make this imagebase truly functional on a search and retrieval basis. We have intended to use Cowardin's wetland classification scheme, Bailey's Ecoregions of the United States, NOAA's NODC Taxonomic Code, Gray's Manual of Botany (though in botany, LCSH seems to hold its own and may be preferable), and the Federal Geographic Data Committee's Content Standards for Digitized Geospatial Metadata. However, there appear to be quite a few classification systems out there for botanicals, vegetation, habitats, ecosystems, zoology, soils (hydric soils), hydrological systems, etc. and many seem to be parochial to certain governmental agencies or particular groupings of scholars.

Much of the conversation on this list has dealt with art, architectural, and human historical aspects of image management, which will be of use to us for many of our images. However, our major need for image description lies in the bio/eco sciences.

I would like to hear from those of you who have worked on similar scientific research imagebases and how you tackled the descriptive cataloging and specialized thesauri/classification schemes in your metadata records of the images. I'm sure NAL, NLM and the USGS must be into something like this, and I'm hearing that the Missouri Botanical Garden and partners (Smithsonian, UC Berkeley?) are planning or already doing special botanical imagebases.

We're drowning in the wealth of possibilities and hoping to find some sage advice from practiced hands out there. Has someone cut a clear path through to an imagebase that covers these types of subjects using widely accepted classification standards and that works for their user groups. If so, can we talk? We're on the verge of making a major purchase of one of those highly touted, multimedia library automation systems that we hope to parlay into an enterprise-wide information management system. O tempora! O mores! O jargona! ;-)

Sincerely,

Joanne E. Langston Judy Buys Library National Biological Survey - SSC 700 Cajundome Boulevard Lafayette, Louisiana e-mail: Langston ˙ailto:mailto:langstonj@nwrc.gov Buys ˙ailto:mailto:buysj@nwrc.gov 318-266-8545 voice 318-266-8513 fax