 Hi everybody. My name is Nettie Legassi. I'm the associate executive director and NISO and I'm here to talk about two working groups that we've had underway for a little while with some outputs that I hope you'll be interested in. So we have a short time and I will move fast. I'll try to move fast. So I'm just an outline. I'm going to describe the two projects so that hopefully you'll distinguish them. They are different, although they cover metadata. I want to talk about what is a NISO recommended practice in general. And then I'll talk about the work of the two groups, one on eBooks and one on video and audio metadata materials and then talk about what's coming next. So the two projects. One is called eBook Bibliographic Metadata Requirements in the Sale Publication, Discovery, Delivery, and Preservation Supply Chain. That's quite a mouthful. We call it the eBook Metadata Working Group. This work is almost done. We are hoping to see some output in the early part of next year, 2021. And the second group, Video and Audio Metadata is our affectionate name, has a full name. It's called Assessing Video and Audio Metadata Recommendations and Standards for Academic Research and Professional Information. And this work is still underway, and I would say it is not almost done. So a little bit of more information for the eBook Metadata. They've done all of the outputs. They put together a draft recommendation which was available for public comment a few months ago. The comments have arrived and the group is now finalizing the work and we hope to publish it at NISO early part of the year. I'm hoping January. The second group, the Audio and Video Metadata, it's still in the analysis phase and I'll talk a little bit about this during the presentation, but we haven't quite reached the drafting stage. So I think it's still some months before you may even see it for public comment. However, it's still, I think, very interesting and good work that's going on. It's just, you know, a little behind the work and these two groups were not set out at the same time. They are really running on different tracks. So that's not a problem. So what is a NISO Recommended Practice? Well, NISO publishes standards and recommended practices and standards are high level. A lot of musts and mays or shoulds, very formal. They have a longer process because at NISO we are accredited by ANSI, the American National Standards Institute, and so there's procedures that go along with that. However, recommended practices are not standards. They are lower level documents. They don't have the same musts and shoulds. And in fact, some aspects of recommended practices are wholly optional. All parts of recommended practices are optional. They are simply meant to provide leading examples or best work, help people in the community understand how to do something. So both of these document of these working groups are creating recommended practices, which still are run the same way as our standards groups. So at NISO we really work on putting, bringing together different communities to collaborate on solutions to problems. So we have formal procedures and that's my job is making sure that the procedures and the processes are followed in all working groups, and that we all reach consensus at the end of the work. So that hopefully we all agree on what might be included in the recommendations. For the ebook metadata working group, it had really a pretty ambitious charge when it first was created. It included all the things you see in this slide so what are minimal metadata requirements necessary to support work for all kinds of different stakeholders. What's the best way to move metadata through the supply chain so that information is not lost is transmitted accurately. How would records be updated what's the best way for that how to match metadata for multiple sources. What are examples and then also what kinds of recommendations might be established for conformance particularly for onyx and mark, which are the most common impacts in ebook world. This was really ambitious. The group started its work and in discussions realized all of these outputs would be hard to do, but they did accomplish a great deal of the pieces of them. So I just wanted to give a slide to give credit for the members of the working group, which represents all major stakeholders in the ebook industry including librarians, many publishers secondary and primary publishers trade and academic publishers service providers for libraries and service providers for publishers to these and preservation entities as well. What were the outputs or what were the general findings metadata is really complicated in ebook world so some metadata gap gaps that the group found through its processes were that even when metadata would be valid according to a particular record, it doesn't necessarily mean that it's quality for whatever purpose it's meant for it may validate or pass a schema test, but it doesn't necessarily mean that it's good for whatever the person or process is requiring. The concepts are represented in different ways within the same standard I think mark is a really big offender for this, where something that you're trying to express maybe in one part of the record or it may be in another part of the record, depending on who's creating it, and that obviously can create confusion when many many records across and trying to process them in consistent ways. And then of course across standards, different standards, interpret a concept in slightly different ways for their audience and that can be a frequent pain point in communication and interoperability. And then, mainly this is the, this is what the group tried to pay most attention to that there is not enough attention to the context in which metadata exists, how it's received shared used enriched corrected distributed for its entire life cycle. What this working group the ebook metadata working group really worked on was trying to establish enough information in its recommendations for each stakeholder to better understand other stakeholders, and the kinds of requirements that that are needed for each stakeholder in the ebook area. The publisher might better understand the kinds of tasks that a librarian is trying to accomplish, and how their metadata might help or hinder those tasks by the same token, a librarian would better understand when a publisher is sending metadata, the kinds of tasks that they are accomplishing. So moving right along the basic structure of the recommended practice what they what the working group members did was examined five elements it's very difficult to or to be more even complicated to tackle all possible bibliographic elements so they concentrated on five which they figured the core of elements that people parties pay enough attention to. And so these are titles names dates book identifiers ISBNs do is and subject terms and then for each of the element this is what is the content of the recommended practice. There's a definition at a high level and then for each party general recommendations for how these might be managed or described or applied use cases for each of the parties and then specific recommendations so really detailed to the level of if you're doing this don't do that. Please do not x please why for each particular element and then appendices show examples in different metadata types for these elements. So just a few screenshots. This is a use case for names so different stakeholders publishers libraries preservation agencies library service providers retailers and readers. What are their needs. How are they coming to this particular metadata. What are they expecting for this. And then also just an example for a name how that name might be established risks like yeah titles in bits in mark mark XML and onyx so the recommended practice in draft form. Is about 40 pages. And again we hope to have it finalized and available for publication early in the year the group is attending to the comments that were received and making sure that those are addressed and respond that they're responded to. So moving to the second group, our video audio metadata working group and this again is assessing video and audio metadata recommendations and standards for academic research and professional information. This is a very practical minded group. It was initiated by someone in the community who is managing video assets and wants to be sure she's relatively. You know it's a it's a new company and she wants to be sure that the information is usable and so she was asking all of her clients and partners for what kinds of things that they needed to have for effective. Transactions and she thought it would be nice if we all could agree on what is needed so this is the how the working group got together. So for each person each party person in this landscape, what information do they need so that they can interact with the systems that are relevant to them in the world of video and audio metadata so what this group is undertaking right now is research there they're still in their discovery phase which I'll be explaining the output when it is created next year is intended to be a checklist of metadata what kind of what elements for metadata in different metadata standards and some links and pointers to these other standards and other resources so they are not creating a new standard this is nothing new they're simply using the standards that exist already for these types of assets and then making recommendations for what elements from these standards should be used when describing particular assets, assets, particularly when they are intended to be interacting with other systems and what is not interacting with another system these days. So when the group brainstorm just to throw it in they were brainstorming on all the different media types and came up with 71 so it's quite quite a few different types of assets. Again, I want to give credit to the members of this working group coming from different parts of the industry to discuss their own perspectives their own requirements and their own expectations for what they might gain from the output of this group and they've been working very hard to to in this discovery phase that I mentioned because created so far is something they're calling a straw man so there they created a structure consisting of bibliographic technical semantic administrative metadata areas and then within each of the areas are had created what kind of general elements are needed for the different levels so for example in a bibliographic area, you might need identifiers contributors publishers original language that kind of thing at a first level there maybe there's second level or even more fine grained information for technical metadata, you might need certain elements, and then what they're doing now is examining these, this construct against use cases for each of the parties stakeholders, and then taking those use cases and examining them against actual standards can standards satisfy the use cases if we have elements for each of these properties in the metadata. I'm not I don't have any use cases to to show you but in general, they are examining use cases contributed by content creators, what is required for content creator, discoverability, etc. What do librarians need to accomplish when managing these kinds of assets preservation vendors or end users and the standards again when the group brainstorm what kind of standards are available in this area there's quite a few as you can see what they have selected are six standards, PB core mods ebu core Dublin core mark and the video metadata hub, and examining the elements for each of these against the use cases and that straw man to make more specific recommendations if you are using PB core. These are the elements of PB core that you should apply to the materials that you are producing or that you're sending out into the landscape. So what's more what's next what's more. There, as I said, ebook metadata output we are expecting very early in the year so please look for that on the nice so website, and you can find out more about the video audio metadata guidelines also on the nice so website. So nice so on Twitter. This is a great way to keep up on the work that we're doing and what's next and when we announce projects for public comment or availability and on our website there's also a way to sign up for our newsletter and you'll see what when these come out when we'll announce them so thank you so much and stay safe and be well.