Metadata Dialects

From Federation of Earth Science Information Partners
The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

Metadata content can be approached in a variety of “dialects,” depending on the needs of specific user communities. Though different, these languages also significantly overlap – as the “who, where, when, why, and how” must always be addressed, regardless of the community approach. Thus, in reality, these differences in approach are more akin to dialects of a universal documentation language than multiple, disparate languages. As such, for the purposes of this work, the term “metadata dialect” will refer to standardized metadata documentation approaches, in order to promote emphasis on universal documentation concepts as opposed to implementation of individual standards. The following are some of the most common dialects used throughout the ESIP community.

Note: While they are discussed independently, a dialect can use aspects of other dialects within its own — if the two dialects have the same/similar structure or the same file format.

Let's Start at the Beginning