Comparative Analysis of Selected Metadata Standards for the Processing of Intangible Cultural Heritage

1. Uvod

Razvojem informacijsko-komunikacijskih tehno­logija (IKT) i Interneta de facto je omogućena in­terpretacija kulturne baštine na moderniji način, u digitalnom okruženju. Kulturni objekti se u takvom okruženju predstavljaju metapodacima - podacima o podacima, putem standarda metapodataka radi pronalaženja i razmjene informacija. Hajdarpašić, Dizdar i Khattab (2023: 108) tvrde da standardi­zacija osigurava razumljivost metapodataka, kako iz perspektive stvarnih korisnika, tako i iz aspekta softverskih aplikacija. Standardizacija olakšava ra­zumijevanje, upotrebu i upravljanje kroz strukturi­rane, opisane i organizirane metapodatke.

American Library Association Committee on Ca- taloging: Description and Access Task Force on Metadata navodi da standard metapodataka pruža formalnu strukturu dizajniranu da identifikuje struk­turu znanja date discipline i da poveže tu strukturu na informacije u disciplini kroz stvaranje informa- cionog sistema koji će pomoći identifikaciji, otkri­vanju i korištenju informacija unutar te discipline (Mai Chan i Lei Zeng, 2006: 2).

Prema tome, cilj standarda je izložiti bogat sadržaj koji podržava izradu, deponovanje, razmjenu, vi- zualizaciju, ponovnu upotrebu i očuvanje resursa u digitalnom okruženju. Postoji veliki broj standarda metapodataka koje su specifični za određeno pod­ručje primjene.

U domenu obrade metapodataka kulturne baštine poseban izazov se odnosi na nematerijalnu kulturnu baštinu. UNESCO u The Convention for the Safe- guarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage (2003:

1. Introduction

The development of information and communi- cation technologies (ICT) and the Internet has de facto enabled the interpretation of cultural heritage in a more modern way, in a digital environment. In such an environment, cultural objects are represent- ed by metadata - data about data, through metadata standards for the purpose of finding and exchanging information. Hajdarpašić, Dizdar & Khattab (2023: 108) claim that standardization ensures the compre- hensibility of metadata, both from the perspective of real users and from the perspective of software applications. Standardization facilitates understand- ing, use and management through structured, de- scribed and organized metadata.

The American Library Association Committee on Cataloging: Description and Access Task Force on Metadata states that a metadata standard provides a formal structure designed to identify the knowl- edge structure of a given discipline and to relate that structure to information in the discipline through the creation of an information system that will aid in the identification, discovery, and use of informa- tion within that discipline (Mai Chan & Lei Zeng, 2006: 2).

Therefore, the goal of the standard is to expose rich content that supports the creation, storage, exchange, visualization, reuse and preservation of resources in the digital environment. There are a number of application-specific metadata standards.

In the domain of cultural heritage metadata process- ing, a special challenge relates to intangible cultural heritage. UNESCO in The Convention for the Safe-

190

Pregledom radova koji tematiziraju standarde me- tapodataka za obradu kulturnog naslijeđa identifi- kovan je problem nepostojanja istraživanja kompa­rativne analize koji nude standarde metapodataka za obradu nematerijalne kulturne baštine. Stoga postoji potreba da se ponude standardi metapoda- taka koji će biti primjenjivi za obradu takve vrste naslijeđa. S tim u vezi, cilj ovog rada je predstaviti standarde metapodataka kulturnih objekata te njiho­vom komparativnom analizom procijeniti kvalitet i primjenjivost standarda metapodataka za obradu nematerijalne kulturne baštine. Sve to je ispitano deskriptivnom, a potom komparativnom analizom najčešće korištenih standarda metapodataka: Du- blin Core, CCO, VRA Core, CDWA i MODS koji se koriste za opisivanje kulturnih objekata. Primje­na odabranih standarda metapodataka ispitana je na primjeru metapodatkovne obrade Skokova sa Sta­rog mosta u Mostaru koji se nalaze na Preliminarnoj otvorenoj listi nematerijalne kulturne baštine Bosne i Hercegovine.¹

Prema The Dublin Core Metadata Initiative “Da- blinsko jezgro”, poznato i kao skup elemenata me- tapodataka Dublin Core,² opći je, međunarodno naj­više primjenjiv, standard metapodataka u velikom broju modela koji se koristi za opisivanje različitih vrsta digitalnih resursa. Specifičan standard za de­taljnije opisivanje kulturnih objekata je Cataloging Cultural Objects - CCO. Visual Resources Asso- ciation navodi da je CCO priručnik koji će pomoći da se opišu, dokumentiraju i katalogiziraju kulturni artefakti (poput umjetnosti i arhitekture) i vizual­ni mediji koji ih predstavljaju.³ Visual Resources Association Core Categories - VRA Core je također specifičan standard metapodataka koji se koristi za detaljnije opisivanje vizualnih resursa. VRA Core

Preliminarna lista nematerijalne kulturne baštine Bosne i Hercego­vine.http://unescobih.mcp.gov.ba/konkursi/?id=15125.

Ibričić

guarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage (2003: 4) defines that intangible cultural heritage means practices, representations, expressions, knowledge, skills - as well as instruments, objects, artefacts and cultural spaces associated with them - which com- munities, groups and, in some cases, individuals recognize as part of their cultural heritage. Rich in- tangible cultural heritage on the example of Bosnia and Herzegovina represents the cultural identity of the state, and the obligation of citizens to preserve the values of intangible cultural heritage for future generations.

By reviewing the papers that thematize metadata standards for the processing of cultural heritage, the problem of the lack of comparative analysis research that offers metadata standards for the processing of intangible cultural heritage was identified. Based on the above, there is a need to offer metadata standards that will be applicable for the processing of this type of legacy. In this regard, the goal of this paper is to present the metadata standards of cultural objects, and through their comparative analysis to assess the quality and applicability of metadata standards for the processing of intangible cultural heritage. All of this was examined through a descriptive and then comparative analysis of the most commonly used metadata standards: Dublin Core, CCO, VRA Core, CDWA, and MODS, which are used to describe cul- tural objects. The application of selected metadata standards was examined on the example of metadata processing of Jumps from the Old Bridge in Mostar, which are on the Preliminary Open List of Intangible Cultural Heritage of Bosnia and Herzegovina.¹ According to The Dublin Core Metadata Initiative, also known as the set of Dublin Core metadata el- ements,² is a general, internationally most applica- ble, metadata standard in a large number of models used to describe different types of digital resources. A specific standard for describing cultural objects in more detail is Cataloging Cultural Objects - CCO. The Visual Resources Association states that CCO is a manual to help describe, document, and catalog cultural artifacts (such as art and architecture) and the visual media that represent them.³ Visual Re-

¹ Bosna i Hercegovina, Državna komisija za saradnju sa UNESCO-m. Preliminarna lista nematerijalne kulturne baštine Bosne i Hercego­vine. (Bosnia and Herzegovina, The State Commission for UNESCO of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Preliminary list of intangible cultural heritage of Bosnia and Herzegovina.)http://unescobih.mcp.gov.ba/ konkursi/?id=15125.

² See: Dublin Core: DCMI Metadata Terms. The Dublin Core Metada- ta Initiative.https://www.dublincore.org/specifications/dublin-core/ dcmi-terms/.

³ See: Cataloging Cultural Objects (CCO). Visual Resources Associa- tion.https://www.vraweb.org/cco.

191

BOSNIACA 2024; 29: 189-220

je standard podataka za opis djela vizuelne kulture kao i slika koje ih dokumentuju (An introduction to VRA Core, 2014: 1). Kako bi se osiguralo cjelovi­to opisivanje i dokumentiranje umjetničkih djela u kombinaciji s VRA Core često se koristio složeniji skup pod nazivom Categories for the Description of Works of Art - CDWA, koji sadrži skup smjerni­ca za najbolju praksu u katalogizaciji i opisivanju (CDWA, 2022: 1). Detaljniji standard metapodataka je i Metadata Object Description Schema - MODS, koji se može koristiti u različite svrhe, a posebno za bibliotečke aplikacije.⁴ Predstavljeni standardi služe za opisivanje kulturnih objekata, ali svi se među­sobno razlikuju u opsegu podataka i iscrpnosti svog opisa.

U okviru toga u analizu se krenulo od istraživačkih pitanja:

U poglavlju Diskusija, ovaj će rad ponuditi odgo­vore na postavljena istraživačka pitanja, što će u konačnici rada predstaviti standarde metapodataka koji se mogu koristiti za obradu nematerijalne kul­turne baštine.

2. Pregled literature

Traganjem za radovima koji tematiziraju primjenu standarda metapodataka za metapodatkovnu obra­du nematerijalne kulturne baštine pronađeno je samo nekoliko istraživanja koja ilustruju primjenu odabranih standarda metapodataka, što ukazuje na neistraženost njihove primjene za obradu nemateri­jalne kulturne baštine.

Koautorski rad autora Giannoulakis, Tsapatsoulis i Grammalidis s Kipra i Grčke pod nazivom “Meta- data for Intangible Cultural Heritage - The Case of Folk Dances” (2018) rad je koji metapodatkovno obrađuje narodni ples koji predstavlja pravi pri­mjer nematerijalne kulturne baštine. Rad predlaže shemu metapodataka za opisivanje različitih ele-

sources Association Core Categories - VRA Core is also a specific metadata standard used to describe visual resources in more detail. VRA Core is a data standard for describing works of visual culture as well as the images that document them (An intro- duction to VRA Core, 2014: 1). In order to ensure a complete description and documentation of works of art in combination with VRA Core, a more com- plex set called Categories for the Description of Works of Art - CDWA was often used. It contains a set of guidelines for best practice in cataloging and description (CDWA, 2022; 1). A more detailed metadata standard is Metadata Object Description Schema - MODS, which can be used for various purposes, especially for library applications.⁴ The presented standards serve to describe cultural ob- jects, but they all differ from each other in the scope of the data and the exhaustiveness of their descrip- tion.

Within the framework of the above, the analysis started from research questions:

- What type of digital objects does the standard describe?

- What metadata elements do the standard con- tain?

- What is the scope of the data?

- What is the metadata syntax?

- Is the metadata standard interoperable with other standards?

- What is the acceptance of the standard?

- Is the standard easy to implement?

- How does the standard manage security and data protection?

In the Discussion chapter, this paper will offer an- swers to the research questions, which will ulti- mately present metadata standards that can be used for the processing of intangible cultural heritage.

2. Literature review

Searching for works that discuss the application of metadata standards for the metadata processing of intangible cultural heritage, only a few studies were found that illustrate the application of selected metadata standards, which indicates that their ap- plication for the processing of intangible cultural heritage has not been researched.

The co-authored work of the authors Giannoulakis, Tsapatsoulis, and Grammalidis from Cyprus and Greece entitled “Metadata for Intangible Cultural Heritage - The Case of Folk Dances” (2018) is a

⁴ See: MODS, 2022a.

192

Ibričić

menata narodnog plesa, to jest digitalni koreograf­ski model, koji je inspirisan glavnim standardima metapodataka za obradu kulturne baštine, između ostalih najčešće korištenim Dublin Core standar­dom metapodataka. Iako je rezultat projekta “Tran- sforming Intangible Folkloric Performing Arts into Tangible Choreographic Digital Objects”,⁵ rad isti­če još projekata Evropske komisije poput projekta “i-Treasures: intangible cultural heritage of the past available through advanced modern technologies”. Rezultat ovog projekta je otvorena i proširena plat­forma snimljenih nematerijalnih kulturnih izraza dostupnih u digitalnom obliku, nastala kombinaci­jom skupa elemenata metapodataka Dublin Corea, modela i-Treasures i ESE - Europeana Semantic Elements.⁶ Još jedan evropski projekt je Wholodan- ce koji ima cilj zaštititi i očuvati plesne pokrete kao nematerijalnu kulturnu baštinu primjenom revolu­cionarnih tehnologija i Dublin Core standarda me- tapodataka, u učenju plesa.⁷ Kada je riječ o Dublin Core standardu metapodataka u kontekstu organi- zovanja nematerijalne kulturne baštine u digital­nom okruženju vrijedi istaći princip metapodataka “jedan na jedan” od strane Dublin Core Metadata Initiatives (DCMI) koji se koristi kao temeljni kon­cept modela pod nazivom Cultural Heritage in Di- gital Environments (CHDE), a koji je rezultat istra­živanja “A Metadata Model to Organize Cultural Heritage Resources in Heterogeneous Information Environments” (2017) autora Wijesundara, Win- da i Sugimoto iz Japana. S tim u vezi, istraživanje “Metadata Model for Organizing Digital Archives of Tangible and Intangible Cultural Heritage, and Linking Cultural Heritage Information in Digital Space” (2018) autora Wijesundara i Sugimoto pri­kazuje primjenu CHDE modela koji se odnosi na materijalnu i nematerijalnu kulturnu baštinu. Auto­ri O’Neill & Stapleton iz Irske u radu “Digital cul- tural heritage standards: from silo to semantic web” (2022) ukazuju na fundamentalni pomak od tradi­cionalnog modeliranja zatvorenih sistema podataka na otvorene skupove podataka za semantičku mre­žu evaluacijom standarda metapodataka, što uklju­čuje razvoj proširenih verzija, interoperabilnosti između sistema te sposobnosti opisivanja širokog

sures-intangible-cultural-heritage-past-available-through-advanced- modern-technologies.

work that metadata processes a folk dance that rep- resents a true example of intangible cultural her- itage. The paper proposes a metadata scheme for describing different elements of folk dance, i.e. a digital choreographic model, which is inspired by the main metadata standards for cultural heritage processing, among others the most commonly used Dublin Core metadata standard. Although the work is the result of the “Transforming Intangible Folk- loric Performing Arts into Tangible Choreographic Digital Objects”⁵ project, the work highlights other projects of the European Commission such as the project “i-Treasures: the Intangible Cultural Herit- age of the Past available through advanced modern technologies”. The result of this project is an open and expanded platform of recorded intangible cul- tural expressions available in digital form, created by the combination of a set of Dublin Core metadata elements, the i-Treasures model, and ESE - Europe- ana Semantic Elements.⁶ Another European project is Wholodance, which aims to protect and preserve dance movements as an intangible cultural heritage by applying revolutionary technologies and Dublin Core metadata standards, in learning dance.⁷ When it comes to the Dublin Core metadata standard in the context of organizing intangible cultural herit- age in a digital environment, it is worth highlight- ing the one-to-one metadata principle by the Dublin Core Metadata Initiatives (DCMI), which is used as the basic concept of the model called Cultural Her- itage in Digital Environments (CHDE), which is the result of the research “A Metadata Model to Organ- ize Cultural Heritage Resources in Heterogeneous Information Environments” (2017) by Wijesundara, Wind and Sugimoto from Japan. In this regard, the research “Metadata Model for Organizing Digital Archives of Tangible and Intangible Cultural Her- itage, and Linking Cultural Heritage Information in Digital Space” (2018) by Wijesundara and Sugimo- to shows the application of the CHDE model related to tangible and intangible cultural heritage. Authors O’Neill & Stapleton from Ireland in the work “Digi- tal cultural heritage standards: from silo to semantic web” (2022) indicate a fundamental shift from tradi- tional modeling of closed data systems to open data

⁵ More about the project at: Transforming Intangible Folkloric Perfor- ming Arts into Tangible Choreographic Digital Objects. European Commission.https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/691218/en.

⁶ More about the project at: i-Treasures: intangible cultural heritage of the past available through advanced modern technologies. Eu- ropean Commission.https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/news/i- treasures-intangible-cultural-heritage-past-available-through-advan- ced-modern-technologies.

⁷ More about the project at: Wholodance: Whole-Body Interaction Le- arning for Dance Education.http://www.wholodance.eu/.

193

BOSNIACA 2024; 29: 189-220

spektra stavki deskriptivnim, strukturnim i admini­strativnim metapodacima. Iako rad u fokus istra­živanja stavlja Metadata Encoding and Transmi- ssion Standard (METS), ističe se da Dublin Core i MODS standardi metapodataka, posebno odnoseći se na MODS koji je kreirala Kongresna biblioteka inspirisana MARC formatom, kao i METS stan­dard metapodataka, pružaju bogat opis materijalne i nematerijalne kulturne baštine.

Iako je primjena standarda metapodataka u obradi nematerijalne kulturne baštine neistražena, vidno je da postoje radovi koji tematiziraju neke od oda­branih standarda metapodataka. S tim u vezi, u na­stavku će biti ispitana primjena odabranih standarda metapodataka ovoga istraživanja za obradu nemate­rijalne kulturne baštine.

3. Metodologija

Istraživanje kombinuje kvalitativni pristup s de­skriptivnom metodom te komparativnom analizom Dublin Core, CCO, VRA Core, CDWA i MODS standarda metapodataka, s ciljem da se ispita pri­mjenjivost odabranih standarda metapodataka za obradu nematerijalne kulturne baštine. Za potrebe analize, kao primjer metapodatkovne obrade oda­branim standardima metapodataka odabrani su Skokovi sa Starog mosta u Mostaru, koji predstav­ljaju nematerijalnu kulturnu baštinu Bosne i Her­cegovine.

Jenn Riley (2010a) u Glossary of metadata stand- ards navodi sveukupno 105 standarda koji se ko­riste za opisivanje kulturnih objekata/resursa u di­gitalnom okruženju. Jedan od međunarodno najpo­znatijih standarda metapodataka je Dublin Core.

Dublin Core (DC) predstavlja standard metapodata- ka koji se koristi za opis informacijskih izvora i pro­nalaženje resursa na mreži. Naziv “Dublin” je zbog njegovog porijekla s pozivne radionice u Dablinu u Ohaju 1995; “Core” jer su njegovi elementi široki i generički, upotrebljivi za opisivanje širokog spektra resursa (Dublin Core, 2012). Standard je u početku definirao trinaest elemenata, a taj broj je vremenom porastao na petnaest Dublin Core elemenata za opis različitih vrsta mrežnih izvora.

Petnaest elemenata “Dublin Core™” opisanih u ovom standardu dio je većeg skupa rječnika me- tapodataka i tehničkih specifikacija koje održava

sets for the semantic web by evaluating metadata standards that include the development of extend- ed versions, interoperability between systems and the ability to describe a wide range of items with descriptive, structural and administrative metadata. Although the work focuses on the Metadata Encod- ing and Transmission Standard (METS), it is em- phasized that the Dublin Core and MODS metadata standards, especially referring to the MODS created by the Library of Congress inspired by the MARC format as well as the METS metadata standard, pro­vide a rich description of tangible and intangible cultural heritage.

Although the application of metadata standards in the processing of intangible cultural heritage is un- explored, it can be seen that there are works that the- matize some of the selected metadata standards. In this regard, the following will examine the applica- tion of selected metadata standards of this research for the processing of intangible cultural heritage.

3. Methodology

The research combines a qualitative approach with a descriptive method, and a comparative analysis of Dublin Core, CCO, VRA Core, CDWA, and MODS metadata standards, to examine the applicability of selected metadata standards for the processing of intangible cultural heritage. For analysis, the Jumps from the Old Bridge in Mostar, which represent the intangible cultural heritage of Bosnia and Herzego- vina, were selected as an example of metadata pro- cessing using selected metadata standards.

Jenn Riley (2010a) in Glossary of metadata stand- ards lists a total of 105 standards used to describe cultural objects/resources in the digital environ- ment. One of the most internationally known meta- data standards is Dublin Core.

Dublin Core (DC) is a metadata standard used to describe information sources and find resources on- line. The name “Dublin” owes its origin to an invi- tational workshop in Dublin, Ohio in 1995; “Core” because its elements are broad and generic, usable to describe a wide range of resources (Dublin Core, 2012). The standard initially defined thirteen ele- ments, and that number grew over time to fifteen Dublin Core elements to describe different types of network resources.

194

Ibričić

Dublin Core™ Metadata Initiative (DCMI). Pot­puni skup rječnika, termini DCMI metapodataka [DCMI-TERMS], također uključuje skupove klasa resursa (uključujući DCMI tip vokabulara [DCMI- TYPE]), šeme kodiranja rječnika i šeme kodiranja sintakse. Termini u DCMI vokabularima namije­njeni su da se koriste u kombinaciji s terminima iz drugih, kompatibilnih rječnika u kontekstu profila aplikacije i na osnovu DCMI apstraktnog modela [DCAM] (Dublin Core, 2012).

Elementi Dublin Core skupa elemenata metapoda- taka, verzije 1.1, koji su odobreni u standardima ISO standard 15836:2009, ANSI/NISO standard Z39.85-2012 i IETF RFC 5013 pod imenom The Dublin Core metadata element set (DCMES) su sljedeći:

Bitna odlika DC je što je svaki opisni element unutar zapisa moguće ponavljati po potrebi i što njihov redoslijed nije određen standardom, te nije obavezno navesti sve opisane elemente (Dizdar, 2011: 303). Upravo zbog njegovih podataka opisa i jednostavnosti, što je i bio cilj Dublin Corea, ovaj standard metapodataka je široko rasprostranjen već u ranoj fazi postojanja. Vremenom su implemen- tatori metapodataka tražili strukturalniji opis. Da-

The fifteen “Dublin Core™” elements described in this standard are part of a larger set of metadata vo- cabularies and technical specifications maintained by the Dublin Core™ Metadata Initiative (DCMI). The full vocabulary set, DCMI Metadata Terms [DC- MI-TERMS], also includes sets of resource classes (including DCMI Vocabulary Type [DCMI-TYPE]), dictionary encoding schemes, and syntax encoding schemes. Terms in DCMI vocabularies are intend- ed to be used in combination with terms from other, compatible vocabularies in the context of an applica- tion profile and based on the DCMI Abstract Model [DCAM] (Dublin Core, 2012).

The elements of the Dublin Core metadata element set, version 1.1, which are approved in ISO standard 15836:2009, ANSI/NISO standard Z39.85-2012 and IETF RFC 5013 under the name The Dublin Core metadata element set (DCMES), are as follows:

summary, table of contents, graphic display or free text display of sources),

An essential feature of DC is that each descriptive element within the record can be repeated as needed and that their order is not determined by the standard, so it is not mandatory to list all the described ele- ments (Dizdar, 2011: 303). Precisely because of its data description and simplicity, which was the goal

195

BOSNIACA 2024; 29: 189-220

blinska inicijativa za metapodatke jezgra (DCMI), koja održava vokabular, proširila je jednostavni DC “kvalifikatorima” kako bi pružila dodatno pre- ciziranje ključnih elemenata. Ova proširena verzija sada je poznata kao DCTERMS.⁸ DC i DCTERMS su definirani i kao XML i RDF vokabulari (Riley, 2017: 24). Korisnost koju pruža složeniji Dublin Core, a koji može biti složen koliko je potrebno, pokazat će vremenom implementacija standarda u projektima.

U nastavku rada bit će predstavljena implementaci­ja metapodatkovne obrade Dublin Core standardom metapodataka na primjeru Skokova sa starog mosta u Mostaru:

of Dublin Core, this metadata standard was widely distributed already in the early phase of its existence. Over time, metadata implementers sought a more structured description. The Dublin Core Metada- ta Initiative (DCMI), which maintains the vocabu- lary, has extended the simple DC with “qualifiers” to provide further refinement of key elements. This expanded version is now known as DCTERMS.⁸ DC and DCTERMS are defined as both XML and RDF vocabularies (Riley, 2017: 24). The utility provided by the more complex Dublin Core, which can be as complex as necessary, will be shown over time by the implementation of the standards in the projects.

In the continuation of the work, the implementation of metadata processing by the Dublin Core meta- data standard will be presented on the example of Jumps from the Old Bridge in Mostar:

<metadata xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">

<dc:title>Jumps from the Old Bridge in Mostar</dc:title>

<dc:creator>Club of diving "Mostari"</dc:creator>

<dc:subject>Mostar</dc:subject>

<dc:subject>Old Bridge</dc:subject>

<dc:subject>Jumps into the water</dc:subject>

<dc:subject>Sports tradition</dc:subject>

<dc:subject>Cultural Events</dc:subject>

<dc:subject>Bosnia and Herzegovina</dc:subject>

<dc:description>Jumps from the Old Bridge in Mostar are an annual sports and cultural event that gathers brave jumpers from all over the world. Jumpers compete in the categories of leg jumps and head jumps (swallow). This event is a symbol of courage, tradition and culture of Mostar.</dc:description>

<dc:publisher>Club of diving "Mostari"</dc:publisher>

<dc:contributor>Jumpers from around the world</dc:contributor>

<dc:contributor>Volunteers</dc:contributor>

<dc:contributor>Tourists</dc:contributor>

<dc:date>2024-07-28</dc:date>

<dc:type>Event</dc:type>

<dc:format>Video</dc:format>

<dc:format>Photos</dc:format>

<dc:format>Text</dc:format>

<dc:identifier>https://example.com/skokovi-mostar-2024</dc:identifier>

<dc:language>eng</dc:language>

<dc:coverage>Mostar, Bosnia and Herzegovina</dc:coverage>

<dc:rights>Protected rights of event organizers and media.</dc:rights>

</metadata>

⁸ Više o DCTERMS na: Dublin Core: DCMI Metadata Terms. The Dublin Core Metadata Initiative.https://www.dublincore.org/speci- fications/dublin-core/dcmi-terms/.

⁸ More about DCTERMS at: Dublin Core: DCMI Metadata Terms. The Dublin Core Metadata Initiative.https://www.dublincore.org/ specifications/dublin-core/dcmi-terms/.

196

Od ukupno petnaest elemenata Dublin Corea, opi­su nedostaju sljedeći metapodaci: Source koji daje izvor opisanog resursa i Relation koji identifikuje povezani resurs. U okviru toga vrijedi spomenuti da se neki elementi ponavljaju više puta, poput Date elementa, što je karakteristika DC.

Specifičan standard za detaljnije opisivanje kultur­nih objekata je CCO.

Cataloging Cultural Objects: A Guide to Descri- bing Cultural Works and Their Images (CCO) iz 2006. godine je standard sadržaja za opisivanje, dokumentiranje i katalogiziranje kulturnih djela i njihovih slika. Razvijen je u partnerstvu između Vi- sual Resources Association i the Getty Foundation, i kao takav pokušava da zadovolji potrebe i vizuel- nih resursa (često vezanih za biblioteke) i muzej­skih zajednica (Riley, 2010b); kroz smjernice i pre­poruke o popisu relevantnih informacija o svakom kulturnom objektu.

Baca objašnjava da je CCO osmišljena posebno za članove zajednica koje se bave opisivanjem i dokumentiranjem umjetničkih djela, arhitekture, kulturnih artefakata i slika koje se odnose na njih - specijaliste za muzejsku dokumentaciju, kustose vi- zuelnih resursa, arhiviste, bibliotekare ili bilo koga ko dokumentira kulturne predmete i njihove slike (Baca et al., 2006: xii). U okviru toga, Visual Re- sources Association navodi da se CCO koristi za:⁹ kreiranje djeljivih metapodataka; izgradnju uobiča­jene prakse za muzeje, digitalne biblioteke i arhive; dopunjavanje različitih struktura podataka i standar­da vrijednosti u bilo kojem sistemu i poboljšanje ot­krivanja i pristupa kulturnim djelima. Prema tome, osnovni cilj CCO je putem standardizirane metode katalogizacije dodjeljivanjem metapodataka koje se mogu razmjenjivati među različitim institucija­ma omogućiti unaprijeđen pristup i razumijevanje informacija o kulturnim objektima. Sve navedeno CCO postiže putem skupina, odnosno elemenata opisa koji će biti predstavljeni u nastavku:¹⁰

Ibričić

Out of a total of fifteen Dublin Core elements, the description lacks the following metadata: Source which gives the source of the described resource and Relation which identifies the related resource. Within that, it is worth mentioning that some ele- ments are repeated more than once, like the Date element, which is a characteristic of DC that ele- ments are repeated.

A specific standard for describing cultural objects in more detail is CCO.

Cataloging Cultural Objects: A Guide to Describing Cultural Works and Their Images (CCO) from 2006 is a content standard for describing, documenting and cataloging cultural works and their images. It was developed in partnership between the Visual Resources Association and the Getty Foundation, and as such attempts to meet the needs of both the visual resources (often related to libraries) and mu- seum communities (Riley, 2010b) through guide- lines and recommendations on the list of relevant information about each cultural object.

Baca explains that CCO is designed specifically for members of the communities involved in describing and documenting works of art, architecture, cultural artefacts and related images - museum documenta- tion specialists, curators of visual resources, archi- vists, librarians or anyone who documents cultural objects, and their images (Baca et al., 2006: xii). Within this, the Visual Resources Association states that CCO is used to:⁹ create shareable metadata; building common practice for museums, digital li- braries and archives; supplementing different data structures and value standards in any system and improving discovery and access to cultural works. Therefore, the main goal of the CCO is to enable improved access and understanding of information about cultural objects through a standardized meth- od of cataloging by assigning metadata that can be exchanged between different institutions. All of the above CCO achieves through groups or elements of the description that will be presented below:¹⁰

⁹ See: Cataloging Cultural Objects (CCO). Visual Resources Associa- tion.https://www.vraweb.org/cco.

¹⁰ More about the definitions of CCO elements at: Baca et al., 2006.

197

BOSNIACA 2024; 29: 189-220

198

Od predstavljenih, obavezni elementi opisa koje zapis treba imati istaknuti su u kurzivu. Nijedan ostali navedeni element opisa nije nužan u zapisu objekta. Odluka o tome donosi se lokalno, odnosno po primjenjivosti elemenata opisa na objekat koji se opisuje. Također, od objekta će zavisiti sintaksa CCO standarda metapodataka, koja se može izrazi­ti u raznim formatima po potrebi, a najčešće je to XML i/ili RDF.

Iako se, kako je navedeno, CCO standard metapo- dataka koristi za obradu kulturnih djela i njihovih slika, pokušaj metapodatkovne obrade primjera ne­materijalne kulturne baštine ovoga rada CCO stan­dardom metapodataka dat je u nastavku:

Ibričić

Of those presented, the mandatory description el- ements that the record should are highlighted in italics. All other listed elements of the description are not necessarily owned by the object record. The decision on this is made locally, i.e. according to the applicability of the elements of the description to the object being described. Also, the syntax of the CCO metadata standard will depend on the object, which can be expressed in various formats as need- ed, most often XML and/or RDF.

Although, as stated, the CCO metadata standard is used for the processing of cultural works and their images, an attempt at metadata processing of ex- amples of intangible cultural heritage of this work using the CCO metadata standard is given below:

<cco:record xmlns:cco="http://www.getty.edu/research/publications/electronic_publications/cco/vocabularies">

<cco:recordID>SM-2024-001</cco:recordID>

<cco:titleSet>

<cco:title>

<cco:titleText>Jumps from the Old Bridge in Mostar</cco:titleText>

</cco:title>

</cco:titleSet>

<cco:descriptiveNoteSet>

<cco:descriptiveNote>

<cco:descriptiveNoteValue>

Jumping from the Old Bridge in Mostar is an annual sports and cultural event that attracts jumpers from all over the world. The competition takes place in two main categories: jumps on the feet and jumps on the head (swallow). This event is known for its tradition and cultural significance in the city of Mostar.

</cco:descriptiveNoteValue>

</cco:descriptiveNote>

</cco:descriptiveNoteSet>

<cco:agentSet>

<cco:agent>

<cco:name>Club of diving "Mostari"</cco:name>

<cco:role>Organizer</cco:role>

</cco:agent>

</cco:agentSet>

<cco:dateSet>

<cco:date>

<cco:dateSingle>2024-07-28</cco:dateSingle>

</cco:date>

</cco:dateSet>

<cco:locationSet>

<cco:location>

<cco:locationName>

<cco:namePart>Old Bridge</cco:namePart>

<cco:namePart>Mostar</cco:namePart>

<cco:namePart>Bosnia and Herzegovina</cco:namePart>

</cco:locationName>

</cco:location>

199

BOSNIACA 2024; 29: 189-220

</cco:locationSet>

<cco:classification>

<cco:term>Sports manifestation</cco:term>

</cco:classification>

<cco:materialSet>

<cco:material>

<cco:term>Video</cco:term>

</cco:material>

<cco:material>

<cco:term>Photos</cco:term>

</cco:material>

<cco:material>

<cco:term>Text reports</cco:term>

</cco:material>

</cco:materialSet>

<cco:relationSet>

<cco:relation>

<cco:relationshipType>Relationship with UNESCO World Heritage Site</cco:relationshipType>

<cco:work>

<cco:titleSet>

<cco:title>Old Bridge, Mostar, Bosnia and Herzegovina</cco:title>

</cco:titleSet>

<cco:id type="external">UNESCO-946</cco:id>

</cco:work>

</cco:relation>

</cco:relationSet>

<cco:rightsSet>

<cco:rights>

<cco:rightsHolder>Diving Club "Mostari"</cco:rightsHolder>

<cco:rightsType>Video and media copyrights</cco:rightsType>

</cco:rights>

</cco:rightsSet>

</cco:record>

Vidno je da zapis CCO standardom metapodataka pruža suštinske informacije o Skokovima sa Starog mosta u Mostaru, ali da od ukupno devet skupina elemenata opisa CCO standard metapodataka ne može pružiti niti obavezne elemente zapisu nema­terijalne kulturne baštine.

Osim CCO, za opisivanje kulturnih djela i njihovih slika koriste se dobro uspostavljeni skupovi ele­menata, odnosno standardi strukture: VRA Core i CDWA.

VRA Core je također specifičan standard metapoda- taka koji je nastao kao potreba profesionalne zajed­nice za standardom metapodataka koji će se koristi za detaljnije opisivanje vizuelnih resursa. Djela vi-

It can be seen that the CCO metadata standard re- cord provides essential information about the Jumps from the Old Bridge in Mostar, but that out of a to­tal of nine groups of description elements, the CCO metadata standard cannot provide even mandatory elements for the intangible cultural heritage record. In addition to CCO, well-established sets of ele- ments or structure standards are used to describe cultural works and their images: VRA Core and CDWA.

VRA Core is also a specific metadata standard that arose out of the need of the professional commu- nity for a metadata standard to be used to describe

200

Ibričić

zuelne kulture mogu uključivati predmete ili doga­đaje kao što su slike, crteži, skulpture, arhitektura, fotografije, kao i knjige, dekorativne i izvedbene umjetnosti (An introduction to VRA Core, 2014: 1). Razvijen je 1996. godine od strane Visual Resources Association u partnerstvu sa Network Development i MARC standardom Kongresne biblioteke. VRA Core je prvobitno izgrađen na bazi Dublin Core, do­dajući karakteristike potrebne za opis i upravljanje vizuelnim resursima (Riley, 2010b); a tek u verziji 4.0 postao je shema zasnovana na XML-u (Miller, 2022: 273). Trenutna dostupna VRA Core 4.0 she­ma objavljena je 2007. godine i ima dvije verzije za implementaciju: verzija neograničeno specificira osnovnu strukturu sheme, dok verzija ograničeno proširuje neograničenu shemu dodavanjem kontro­liranih lista tipova i formata datuma.

Karakteristična karakteristika VRA Core je razdva­janje metapodataka o samom umjetničkom djelu i metapodataka o slikama tih djela (Riley, 2017: 34). To znači da pružajući odvojeni opis VRA Core ele­mentima standard omogućava upravljanje podaci­ma o djelu i slici (vizualnom resursu), koji se mogu grupisati u kolekcije. VRA Core sadrži devetnaest elemenata opisa koji će u nastavku biti prikazani s podelementima i atributima u zagradi:¹¹

visual resources in more detail. Works of visual cul- ture can include objects or events such as paintings, drawings, sculptures, architecture, photographs, as well as books, decorative and performing arts (An introduction to VRA Core, 2014: 1). It was devel- oped in 1996 by the Visual Resources Association in partnership with Network Development and the MARC standard of the Library of Congress. VRA Core was originally built on top of Dublin Core, adding features needed to describe and manage visual resources (Riley, 2010b), and only in version 4.0 did it become an XML-based schema (Miller, 2022: 273). The currently available VRA Core 4.0 scheme was released in 2007 and has two imple- mentation versions: the unlimited version specifies the basic structure of the schema, and the limited version extends the unlimited schema by adding controlled lists of date types and formats.

A distinctive feature of VRA Core is the separation of metadata about the artwork itself and metadata about the images of those works (Riley, 2017: 34). This means that by providing a separate description to the VRA Core elements, the standard enables the management of work and image (visual resource) data, which can be grouped into collections. VRA Core contains nineteen description elements which will be shown below with sub-elements and attrib- utes in parentheses:¹¹

djelo, kolekcija ili slika (id) / work, collection or image (id) agent / agent

najraniji datum (otprilike) / earliest date (approx.)

zadnji datum (otprilike) / last date (approx.)

kulturni kontekst / cultural context

datum (vrsta) / date (type)

opis / description

natpis / inscription

lokacija (vrsta) / location (type)

materijal / vrsta / material (type)

mjere (vrsta, jedinica) / measures (type, unit)

odnos (tip, relids) / relation (type, relids)

prava (vrsta) / right (type)

izvor / source

državno izdanje (broj, broj, vrsta) / government issue (number, number, type)

stilski period / style period

predmet / subject

tehnika / technique

textref / textref

naslov (vrsta) / title (type)

radni tip / working type

¹¹ Više o VRA Core elementima na: Miller, 2022; više o definicijama na: VRA Core 4.0 Element Description.https://www.loc.gov/stan- dards/vracore/VRA_Core4_Element_Description.pdf.

¹¹ More about VRA Core elements at: Miller, 2022; more about defi- nitions at: VRA Core 4.0 Element Description.https://www.loc.gov/ standards/vracore/VRA_Core4_Element_Description.pdf.

201

BOSNIACA 2024; 29: 189-220

Shema također uključuje sljedeće globalne atribu­te koji se mogu koristiti s bilo kojim elementom ili podelementom: dataDate, extent, href (Hypertext REFerence URL), pref (preferirana vrijednost), re- fid (veza na interne identifikatore), pravila, izvor, vocab, xml:lang (Miller, 2022: 277). VRA Core strukturni standard metapodataka uz globalne XML atribute, elemente, podelemente i atribute stvara konzistentan opis vizuelnog resursa te njihovih di­gitalnih kolekcija. Prema tome, VRA Core izražen je u XML sintaksi, ali je pored toga moguće trans- formisati podatke u RDF.

Primjer metapodatkovne obrade VRA Core stan­dardom metapodataka Skokova sa Starog mosta u Mostaru dat je u nastavku:

The schema also includes the following global at- tributes that can be used with any element or subele- ment: dataDate, extent, href (Hypertext REFerence URL), pref (preferred value), refid (link to internal identifiers), rules, source, vocab, xml: long (Miller, 2022: 277). VRA Core metadata structure standard with global XML attributes, elements, sub-elements and attributes creates a consistent description of visual resources and their digital collections. There- fore, VRA Core is expressed in XML syntax, but in addition it is possible to transform the data into RDF.

An example of metadata processing of VRA Core using the metadata standard Jumps from the Old Bridge in Mostar is given below:

<vra:workset xmlns:vra="http://www.vraweb.org/vracore3.htm">

<vra:work>

<vra:id type="local">SM-2024-001</vra:id>

<vra:titleSet>

<vra:title>Jumps from the Old Bridge in Mostar</vra:title>

</vra:titleSet>

<vra:descriptionSet>

<vra:description>

Jumping from the Old Bridge in Mostar is an annual sports and cultural event. The competition gathers jumpers from all over the world, who compete in two main categories: leg jumps and head jumps (swallow). This event is a symbol of the tradition and culture of the city of Mostar.

</vra:description>

</vra:descriptionSet>

<vra:category>Sports manifestation</vra:category>

<vra:agentSet>

<vra:agent>

<vra:name type="corporate">Club of diving "Mostari"</vra:name>

<vra:role>Organizer</vra:role>

</vra:agent>

</vra:agentSet>

<vra:dateSet>

<vra:date>

<vra:dateSingle>2024-07-28</vra:dateSingle>

</vra:date>

</vra:dateSet>

<vra:locationSet>

<vra:location>

<vra:name>Old Bridge, Mostar, Bosnia and Herzegovina</vra:name>

</vra:location>

</vra:locationSet>

<vra:materialSet>

<vra:material>

202

Ibričić

<vra:term>Video</vra:term>

</vra:material>

<vra:material>

<vra:term>Photos</vra:term>

</vra:material>

<vra:material>

<vra:term>Text reports</vra:term>

</vra:material>

</vra:materialSet>

<vra:relationSet>

<vra:relation>

<vra:relationshipType>Relationship with UNESCO World Heritage</vra:relationshipType>

<vra:work>

<vra:titleSet>

<vra:title>Old Bridge, Mostar, Bosnia and Herzegovina</vra:title>

</vra:titleSet>

<vra:id type="external">UNESCO-946</vra:id>

</vra:work>

</vra:relation>

</vra:relationSet>

<vra:rightsSet>

<vra:rights>

<vra:rightsHolder>Diving Club "Mostari"</vra:rightsHolder>

<vra:rightsType>Video and media copyrights</vra:rightsType>

</vra:rights>

</vra:rightsSet>

</vra:work>

</vra:workset>

Poput CCO standarda metapodataka, zapis VRA standardom metapodataka pruža samo suštinske in­formacije o Skokovima sa Starog mosta u Mostaru. Metapodatkovni zapis VRA standardom metapoda- taka ne može pružiti metapodatkovni opis elemena­ta nematerijalne kulturne baštine budući da je ek- splicitno osmišljen za obradu djela vizuelne kulture. Kako bi se osiguralo cjelovito opisivanje i doku­mentiranje umjetničkih djela u kombinaciji s VRA Core često se koristio CDWA.

CDWA predstavlja složeniji strukturni skup eleme­nata / kategorija od VRA Core. Categories for the Description of Works of Art (CDWA) sadrže skup smjernica za najbolju praksu u katalogizaciji i opi­sivanju umjetničkih djela, arhitekture, druge mate­rijalne kulture, grupa i zbirki djela i povezanih slika (CDWA, 2022: 1). CDWA se razvijao postepeno, a pokrenut je 1990-ih dogovorom profesionalne za­jednice umjetnika i Information Task Force (AITF)

Like the CCO metadata standard, the VRA metadata standard record provides only essential information about Jumps from the Old Bridge in Mostar. The metadata record of the VRA metadata standard can- not provide a metadata description of elements of intangible cultural heritage since it is explicitly de- signed for the processing of works of visual culture. In order to ensure a complete description and doc- umentation of artworks in combination with VRA Core, CDWA was often used.

CDWA represents a more complex structural set of elements/categories than VRA Core. The Categories for the Description of Works of Art (CDWA) contain a set of guidelines for best practice in cataloging and describing works of art, architecture, other material culture, groups and collections of works and related images (CDWA, 2022: 1). CDWA developed grad- ually, and was launched in the 1990s by an agree- ment of the professional artist community and the

203

BOSNIACA 2024; 29: 189-220

koju održava Getty Foundation Art. Rad AITF-a je finansirao J. Paul Getty Trust, s dvogodišnjim odgovarajućim grantom National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) za College Art Association (CAA) (CDWA, 2022: 2). CDWA predstavlja kon­ceptualni okvir koji daje upute za stvaranje kvalitet­nog opisa, to jest baze podataka o resursu, te pruža­nje djelotvornih informacija o njemu.

Smjernice za upotrebu razlikuju elemente podataka namijenjene za prikaz i one namijenjene indeksira- nju (Riley, 2010b) kako bi se omogućilo efikasnije pretraživanje dok se istovremeno korisnicima pri­kazuju koherentne informacije (Riley, 2017: 34). Na taj način, CDWA savjetuje da takvo indeksiranje trebaju obavljati obrazovani katalogizatori. Također promoviše upotrebu mjerodavnih izvora za detalje zabilježene u opisu CDWA, ponekad čak sugerira­jući specifične izvore za korištenje u prikupljanju informacija u datoj kategoriji (Riley, 2017: 34). Uz to, smjernice CDWA ukazuju na značaj specifično­sti i iscrpnosti opisa resursa, na neizvjesnost i dvo­smislenost, nepoznatost i neutvrđenost, informacije koje se mogu znati naspram nepoznatih, neslaganje među izvorima, indeksiranje važnih informacija i poznavanje izvora informacija.

CDWA skup sastoji se od oko 540 opisnih elemena­ta / kategorija i potkategorija. Od toga, trenutno sa­drži trideset i jednu kategoriju koja daje minimalne informacije o resursu:¹²

Za objekt, arhitekturu ili grupu / For an object, architecture or group

Razina kataloga / Catalog level

Vrsta objekta/djela / Type of object/work

Pojam klasifikacije / The concept of classification

Naslov ili ime / Title or name

Opis mjerenja / Description of measurements

Opis materijala i tehnika / Description of materials and techniques

Opis kreatora / Creator description

Identitet kreatora / Creator identity

Uloga kreatora / The role of the creator

Datum kreiranja / Creation date

Uslovi indeksiranja predmeta / Subject indexing conditions

Trenutni repozitorij/geografska lokacija / Current repository/geo location

Trenutni brojevi repozitorija / Current repository numbers

Za autoritet za generičke koncepte / For authority on generic concepts

Termin / Term

Povezani generički koncepti (hijerarhijski) / Related generic concepts (hierarchical)

Opseg napomena / Range note

Information Task Force (AITF) maintained by the Getty Foundation Art. AITF’s work was funded by the J. Paul Getty Trust, with a two-year matching grant from the National Endowment for the Human- ities (NEH) to the College Art Association (CAA) (CDWA, 2022: 2). CDWA represents a conceptual framework that provides instructions for creating a quality description, that is, a resource database, and providing effective information about it.

Usage guidelines distinguish between data elements intended for display and those intended for index- ing (Riley, 2010b) to enable more efficient browsing while simultaneously presenting coherent informa- tion to users (Riley, 2017: 34). Thus, CDWA advises that such indexing should be performed by trained catalogers. It also promotes the use of authorita- tive sources for the details recorded in the CDWA description, sometimes even suggesting specific sources to use in gathering information in a given category (Riley, 2017: 34). In addition, the CDWA guidelines point to the importance of specificity and completeness in resource descriptions, uncertainty and ambiguity, unfamiliarity and indeterminacy, knowable versus unknown information, disagree- ment among sources, indexing of important infor- mation, and knowledge of information sources.

The CDWA set consists of about 540 descriptive elements/categories and subcategories. Of these, it currently contains thirty-one categories that provide minimal information about the resource:¹²

Za lice/korporativno tijelo / For a person/corporate body

Ime / Name

Biografija / Biography

Datum rođenja / Date of birth

Datum smrti / Date of death

Nacionalnost/kultura/rasa / Nationality/culture/race

Životne uloge / Life roles

Povezani ljudi/korporativna tijela (ako su hijerarhijski) / Related people/corporate bodies (if hierarchical)

Za upravu za mjesto/lokaciju / For site/location management

Ime mjesta / Place name

Vrsta mjesta / Type of place

Povezana mjesta (hijerarhijski) / Related places (hierarchical)

Za autoritet subjekta / For subject authority

Naziv subjekta / Subject name

Povezani predmeti (ako su hijerarhijski) / Related items (if hierarchical)

¹² Više o definicijama CDWA elemenata na: CDWA, 2022.

¹² More on CDWA element definitions at: CDWA, 2022.

204

Ibričić

Predstavljene kategorije sadrže veliki broj opisnih potkategorija koje detaljnije opisuju resurs. Bitno je naglasiti da se CDWA redovno ažurira kako bi bio aktuelan, te je zbog toga broj kategorija skupa pod­ložan promjenama. Također, CDWA koristi XML shemu za izražavanje elemenata opisa.

Zapis metapodatkovne obrade Skokova sa Starog mosta u Mostaru CDWA standardom metapodataka dat je u nastavku:

The presented categories contain a large number of descriptive subcategories that describe the resource in more detail. It is important to emphasize that the CDWA is regularly updated in order to be current, and therefore the number of set categories is subject to change. Also, CDWA uses an XML schema to express description elements.

The record of the metadata processing of Jumps from the Old Bridge in Mostar by the CDWA meta- data standard is given below:

<cdwa:record xmlns:cdwa="http://www.getty.edu/research/publications/electronic_publications/cdwa/ vocabularies">

<cdwa:identifier>

<cdwa:id>SM-2024-001</cdwa:id>

</cdwa:identifier>

<cdwa:title>

<cdwa:titleText>Jumps from the Old Bridge in Mostar</cdwa:titleText>

</cdwa:title>

<cdwa:creator>

<cdwa:creatorName>Club of diving "Mostari"</cdwa:creatorName>

<cdwa:role>Organizer</cdwa:role>

</cdwa:creator>

<cdwa:date>

<cdwa:dateDate>2024-07-28</cdwa:dateDate>

</cdwa:date>

<cdwa:location>

<cdwa:locationName>Old Bridge</cdwa:locationName>

<cdwa:locationPlace>Mostar, Bosnia and Herzegovina</cdwa:locationPlace>

</cdwa:location>

<cdwa:description>

Jumping from the Old Bridge in Mostar is a traditional sporting and cultural event that gathers jumpers from all over the world. This event includes foot jumps and head jumps (swallow), and symbolizes the cultural heritage and traditions of Mostar.

</cdwa:description>

<cdwa:type>

<cdwa:typeTerm>Sports event</cdwa:typeTerm>

</cdwa:type>

<cdwa:physicalDescription>

<cdwa:form>Video</cdwa:form>

<cdwa:extent>1 video (3 minutes)</cdwa:extent>

<cdwa:form>Photos</cdwa:form>

<cdwa:form>Text reports</cdwa:form>

</cdwa:physicalDescription>

<cdwa:relatedWork>

<cdwa:relatedWorkTitle>Old Bridge, Mostar, Bosnia and Herzegovina</cdwa:relatedWorkTitle>

<cdwa:relatedWorkIdentifier type="external">UNESCO-946</cdwa:relatedWorkIdentifier> <cdwa:relationshipType>Relationship with UNESCO World Heritage Site</cdwa:relationshipType>

</cdwa:relatedWork>

<cdwa:rights>

<cdwa:rightsHolder>Club of diving "Mostari"</cdwa:rightsHolder>

205

BOSNIACA 2024; 29: 189-220

<cdwa:rightsDescription>Video and media copyrights</cdwa:rightsDescription>

</cdwa:rights>

</cdwa:record>

Potpuno je isto kao slučaj s opisom CCO i VRA standardima metapodataka: pokušaj zapisa CDWA standardom metapodataka pruža samo osnovne in­formacije o Skokovima sa Starog mosta u Mostaru. CDWA standard metapodataka namijenjen je mate­rijalnim objektima kulturne baštine te se kao takav ne može koristiti za metapodatkovnu obradu eleme­nata nematerijalne kulturne baštine.

Napokon, detaljniji standard metapodataka koji se koristi za opisivanje različitih vrsta resursa je MODS.

MODS je standard metapodataka koji se koristi za opis različitih vrsta digitalnih resursa, a ne samo za određenu vrstu objekata ili disciplina. MODS je na­stao kao skraćena XML verzija MARC 21 formata za bibliografske podatke (Miller, 2022: 206), i kao takav uključuje podskup MARC polja, koristeći je­zične oznake umjesto numeričkih. MARC i MODS imaju visoku razinu kompatibilnosti te istu svrhu - da bibliografski opišu resurs. Iz tog razloga su od posebnog interesa za biblioteke koje ih naširoko ko­riste. Zato je Kongresna biblioteka i razvila MODS 2002. godine; standard održava The Network De- velopment i ured za MARC standard Kongresne bi­blioteke (MODS, 2022a). Najnovija verzija MODS standarda metapodataka je MODS 3.8.

XML shema MODS sastoji se elemenata, podeleme- nata i atributa. MODS elementi su sljedeći: naslov, naziv, vrsta izvora, žanr, izvor, jezik, fizički opis, sažetak, sadržaj, ciljana publika, bilješka, predmet, klasifikacija, srodna stavka, identifikator, lokacija, pristupni uvjeti, dio, ekstenzija i zapis.¹³ Prikazani elementi, njih ukupno dvadeset, predstavljaju ele­mente najviše razine. Nijedan element nije obave­zan u MODS zapisu, međutim, svaki MODS zapis zahtijeva barem jedan element (MODS, 2022b), koji zajedno s podelementima i atributima MODS standarda metapodataka grupišu povezane dijelove bibliografskog opisa.

MODS shema ima značajnu karakteristiku označe­nu kao MODS imenski prostor. Element proširenja

Exactly the same as the case with the description of CCO and VRA metadata standards, an attempt to record the CDWA metadata standard provides only basic information about the Jumps from the Old Bridge in Mostar. The CDWA metadata standard is intended for material objects of cultural heritage and as such cannot be used for metadata processing of elements of intangible cultural heritage.

And, a more detailed metadata standard used to de- scribe different types of resources is MODS.

MODS is a metadata standard used to describe dif- ferent types of digital resources, not just a specific type of object or discipline. MODS was created as a shortened XML version of the MARC 21 format for bibliographic data (Miller, 2022: 206), and as such includes a subset of MARC fields, using language labels instead of numeric ones. MARC and MODS have a high level of compatibility and the same pur- pose to bibliographically describe a resource. For this reason, they are of particular interest to libraries that use them widely. Actually, MODS was devel- oped by the Library of Congress in 2002; the stand­ard is maintained by the Network Development and MARC Standards Office of the Library of Congress (MODS, 2022a). The latest version of the MODS metadata standard is MODS 3.8.

The MODS XML schema consists of elements, sub-elements and attributes. The MODS elements are as follows: title, name, source type, genre, source, language, physical description, abstract, content, target audience, note, subject, classification, related item, identifier, location, access terms, part, extension, and record.¹³ Shown, a total of twenty of them represent the elements of the highest level. No element is mandatory in a MODS record; however, every MODS record requires at least one element (MODS, 2022b) which, together with sub-elements and attributes of the MODS metadata standard, group related parts of the bibliographic description. The MODS schema has an important feature denoted as the MODS namespace. The extension element is

¹³ More about MODS elements, sub-elements and their attributes with definitions at: MODS, 2022b.

206

Ibričić

posebna je značajka MODS-a, koja omogućuje ume­tanje dodatnih metapodataka u bilo kojem prostoru imena XML u MODS zapis (Riley, 2017: 31). Uloga MODS imenskog prostora jeste da se zapis proširi dodatnim elementom ukoliko je potreban, a sve s ci­ljem stvaranja što boljeg opisa resursa, odnosno im­plementacije MODS standarda metapodataka.

Zapis metapodatkovne obrade MODS standardom metapodataka na primjeru Skokova sa Starog mosta u Mostaru predstavljen je u nastavku rada:

a special feature of MODS, which enables the inser- tion of additional metadata in any XML namespace in a MODS record (Riley, 2017: 31). The role of the MODS namespace is to expand the record with an additional element if needed, all with the aim of cre- ating the best possible description of the resource, i.e. the implementation of the MODS metadata standard. The record of metadata processing by the MODS metadata standard on the example of Jumps from the Old Bridge in Mostar is presented in the contin- uation of the paper:

<mods xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3" version="3.7">

<titleInfo>

<title>Jumps from the Old Bridge in Mostar</title>

</titleInfo>

<name type="corporate">

<namePart>"Mostari Diving Club"</namePart>

<role>

<roleTerm type="text">Organizer</roleTerm>

</role>

</name>

<subject>

<topic>Mostar</topic>

<topic>Old Bridge</topic>

<topic>Jumps into the water</topic>

<topic>Sports manifestation</topic>

<topic>Cultural events</topic>

<geographic>Bosnia and Herzegovina</geographic>

</subject>

<abstract>

Jumping from the Old Bridge in Mostar is an annual sports and cultural event that gathers jumpers from all over the world. The competition includes leg jumps and head jumps (swallow). This event symbolizes the courage, tradition and cultural heritage of the city of Mostar.

</abstract>

<originInfo>

<publisher>Club of diving "Mostari"</publisher>

<dateIssued>2024-07-28</dateIssued>

</originInfo>

<typeOfResource>event</typeOfResource>

<physicalDescription>

<form authority="marcform">video</form>

<internetMediaType>video/mp4</internetMediaType>

<extent>1 video (3 minutes)</extent>

</physicalDescription>

<identifier type="uri">https://example.com/skokovi-mostar-2024</identifier>

<location>

207

BOSNIACA 2024; 29: 189-220

<physicalLocation>Mostar, Old Bridge</physicalLocation>

<url>https://example.com/skokovi-mostar-2024</url>

</location>

<language>

<languageTerm authority="iso639-2b" type="code">eng</languageTerm>

</language>

<relatedItem>

<titleInfo>

<title>Old Bridge - UNESCO World Heritage</title>

</titleInfo>

<identifier type="uri">https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/946</identifier>

</relatedItem>

<subject>

<geographic>Mostar, Bosnia and Herzegovina</geographic>

<temporal encoding="w3cdtf">2024</temporal>

</subject>

<accessCondition type="useAndReproduction">Protected right of event organizers and media.</accessCondition>

</mods>

Od ukupno dvadeset MODS elementa s njihovim podelementima, predstavljenom zapisu nedostaju metapodaci: genre što označava kategoriju, table- OfContents koji se odnosi na sadržaj za resurs, tar- getAudience koji daje opis intelektualnog nivoa pu­blike kojoj je resurs napravljen, note koji daje opće informacije koje se odnose na izvor, classification što označava predmet primjenom sistema kodiranja, part koji opisuje dio resursa, extension što pruža do­datne informacije koje MODS ne pokriva te recor- dInfo koji daje informacije o zapisu.

Summa summarum, implementacija metapodatkov- ne obrade na primjeru Skokova sa Starog mosta u Mostaru pokazuje da su određeni standardi metapo- dataka primjenjivi za obradu nematerijalne kulturne baštine. To će biti dodatno ispitano i predstavljeno u nastavku odgovorima na istraživačka pitanja rada.

5. Komparativna analiza i diskusija

Uvidom u dosadašnje prakse uočeno je da se za opi­sivanje kulturnih objekata najčešće koriste Dublin Core, CCO, VRA Core, CDWA i MODS standardi metapodataka koji su predstavljeni. Konsultiranjem postojeće literature o standardima metapodataka za metapodatkovnu obradu nematerijalne kulturne ba­štine definisana su istraživačka pitanja rada. Postav­ljeno je osam istraživačkih pitanja za komparativnu analizu odabranih standarda metapodataka. Na sva­ko pitanje dat je odgovor posebno za svaki standard metapodataka. Odgovori na pitanja dali su kompa-

From a total of twenty MODS elements with their sub-elements, the presented record lacks metadata: a genre which indicates the category, tableOfCon- tents which refers to the content for the resource, targetAudience which describes the intellectual lev- el of the audience for which the resource was cre- ated, notes which give general information related to the source, classification, which indicates the object by applying the coding system, part, which describes a part of the resource, extension, which provides additional information not covered by MODS, and recording, which provides information about the record.

Summa summarum, that the implementation of metadata processing on the example of Jumps from the Old Bridge in Mostar shows that certain metada- ta standards are applicable for the processing of in- tangible cultural heritage. The above will be further examined and presented in the following answers to the research questions of the work.

5. Comparative analysis and discussion

This paper is qualitative in nature. By looking at current practices, it was observed that Dublin Core, CCO, VRA Core, CDWA and MODS metadata standards are most often used to describe cultural objects, which are presented above using the de- scriptive method. By consulting the existing liter­ature on metadata standards, the research questions of the paper were defined. Eight research questions

208

rativnu sliku i ujedno diskusiju između odabranih standarda metapodataka, čime je izvršena njihova komparativna analiza. Na taj način procijenjen je kvalitet i primjenjivost standarda metapodataka za obradu nematerijalne kulturne baštine, što je cilj ovoga istraživanja.

U nastavku su data pitanja te odgovori na njih:

- Koju vrstu digitalnih objekata opisuje stan­dard?

Dublin Core standard metapodataka koristi se za opisivanje različitih vrsta digitalnih objekata. DCMI za tip vokabulara navodi sljedeće:¹⁴

kolekcije (agregacija resursa), dataset (podaci kodirani u definisanoj strukturi koji se odno­se na liste, tabele i baze podataka), događaj (pružanje deskriptivnih informacija za npr. izložbu, webcast, konferenciju, radionicu, dan otvorenih vrata, performans, bitku, su­đenje, vjenčanje i sl.), slike (vizuelni prikaz npr. slike i fotografije fizičkih objekata, crte­ži, druge slike i grafike, animacije i pokretne slike, filmovi, dijagrami, karte, notni zapisi, elektronske i fizičke reprezentacije), interak­tivni resurs (obrasci na web-stranicama, aple- ti, multimedijalni objekti za učenje, usluge okruženja virtuelne stvarnosti), pokretna sli­ka (animacije, filmovi, televizijski programi, videozapisi, zoetropi), sve vrste fizičkih obje­kata, servise, servere (usluga fotokopiranja, bankarska usluga, usluga provjere autentično­sti, međubibliotečka pozajmica, web-server), softvere (C izvorna datoteka, MS-Windows .exe izvršna datoteka ili Perl skripta), zvuk (audiozvukovi), fotografije bez pokreta (slike, crteži, grafički dizajni, planovi i karte) i tekst (knjige, pisma, disertacije, pjesme, novine, članci, arhive mailing lista).

CCO se primarno odnosi na kulturne objekte um­jetnosti i arhitekture; također pokriva mnoge druge vrste kulturnih djela, uključujući arheološka nala­zišta, artefakte i funkcionalne objekte iz područja materijalne kulture.¹⁵ Kulturna djela uključuju sve vrste opipljive kulturne baštine:

arhitekturu, pejzažnu arhitekturu, druga gra­đevinska djela, predmete kao što su slike, skulpture, murali, crteži, grafike, fotografije,

Ibričić

were asked for the comparative analysis of select- ed metadata standards. Each question is answered separately for each metadata standard. The answers to the questions gave a comparative picture and at the same time a discussion between the selected metadata standards, which made their comparative analysis. In this way, the quality and applicability of metadata standards for the processing of intangible cultural heritage were assessed, which is the goal of this research.

Below are the questions and their answers:

- What type of digital objects does the standard describe?

The Dublin Core metadata standard is used to de- scribe different types of digital objects. The DCMI for the vocabulary type states the following:¹⁴ collection (aggregation of resources), dataset (data encoded in a defined structure referring to lists, tables and databases), event (provid- ing descriptive information for e.g. exhibition, webcast, conference, workshop, open house, performance, battle, trial, wedding, etc.), imag- es (visual representation, e.g. images and pho- tographs of physical objects, drawings, other images and graphics, animations and motion pictures, films, diagrams, maps, sheet music, electronic and physical representations), inter- active resource (forms on web pages, applets, multimedia learning objects, virtual reality environment services), moving images (ani- mations, movies, television programs, vide- os, zoetropes), all kinds of physical objects, services, servers (copying service, banking service, authentication service, interlibrary loan, web server), software (C source file, MS-Windows .exe executable or Perl script), sound (audio sounds), still images (pictures, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps) and text (books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, mailing list archives).

CCO primarily refers to cultural objects of art and architecture; it also covers many other types of cul- tural works, including archaeological sites, artefacts and functional objects from the field of material cul- ture.¹⁵ Cultural works include all types of tangible cultural heritage:

¹⁴ More about vocabulary types in Section 7: DCMI Type Vocabulary at: Dublin Core: DCMI Metadata Terms. The Dublin Core Metada- ta Initiative.https://www.dublincore.org/specifications/dublin-core/ dcmi-terms/.

¹⁵ See: Cataloging Cultural Objects (CCO). Visual Resources Associa- tion.https://www.vraweb.org/cco.

209

BOSNIACA 2024; 29: 189-220

namještaj, keramiku, alate, kostime, tekstil, druge ukrasne ili utilitarne predmete ili bilo koje druge od hiljada vrsta umjetničkog stva­ralaštva i drugih kulturnih ostataka. Uključena su umjetnost performansa, instalacije i radovi specifični za lokaciju. Isključeni su književ­na djela, muzika, scenska umjetnost, jezička umjetnost, kulinarska umjetnost, nauka, reli­gija, filozofija i druga nematerijalna kultura (Baca et al., 2006: 5).

Prema tome, CCO se ne primjenjuje za obradu ne­materijalne kulturne baštine koja je tema ovoga rada. VRA Core poput CCO razvila je Visual Re- sources Association koja se bazira na opisivanje objekata vizuelne kulture podržavajući discipline umjetnosti i arhitekture. Budući da zasebno opisuje djelo i sliku djela, može se koristiti, odnosno prila­goditi i za opisivanje nematerijalne kulturne bašti­ne, ali to nije praksa. Isti je slučaj i s CDWA, koji je također osmišljen za opisivanje umjetničkih djela i materijalne kulture baštine, prvenstveno za zajed­nicu muzeja umjetnosti. Za razliku od njih, MODS poput Dublin Core standarda metapodataka koristi se za opisivanje različitih vrsta digitalnih objekata.

Pregledom vrsta digitalnih objekata koje predstav­ljeni standardi metapodataka opisuju, evidentno je da se od odabranih Dublin Core i MODS standardi metapodataka mogu koristiti za obradu nematerijal­ne kulturne baštine, što je ilustrovano metapodat- kovnim zapisima Skokova sa Starog mosta u Mo­staru.

- Koje elemente metapodataka sadrži standard?

Dublin Core standard metapodataka sastoji se od petnaest elemenata. CCO standard sadržaja sastoji se od devet skupina elemenata opisa. VRA Core sa­drži devetnaest elemenata zajedno s podelementima i atributima, uključujući i globalne atribute. CDWA se sastoji od oko 540 elemenata / kategorija i pot- kategorija. MODS se sastoji od dvadeset elemenata koji imaju svoje podelemente i atribute.

Vidno je da CDWA standard metapodataka sadrži najveći broj elemenata. MODS po broju elemenata ima jedan više od VRA Core koji ima devetnaest, a pet manje od Dublin Core. Najmanji broj elemenata ima CCO. Svi elementi pobrojanih standarda meta- podataka detaljnije su predstavljeni u gornjem po­glavlju rada; a oni s brojem vlastitih podelemenata i atributa koje sadrže daju opis resursa koji obrađuju. Važnost broja elemenata metapodataka koje sadrže standardi ogleda se u opsegu podataka i iscrpnosti opisa resursa koji opisuju. To je naročito važno za

architecture, landscape architecture, other works of construction, objects such as paint- ings, sculptures, murals, drawings, prints, pho- tographs, furniture, ceramics, tools, costumes, textiles, other decorative or utilitarian objects or any other of thousands of artistic creations and other cultural remains. Performance art, installations and site-specific works are in- cluded. Literary works, music, performing arts, language arts, culinary arts, science, reli- gion, philosophy and other intangible culture are excluded (Baca et al., 2006: 5).

Therefore, CCO is not applied for the processing of intangible cultural heritage, which is the subject of this paper. VRA Core like CCO was developed by the Visual Resources Association which is based on describing objects of visual culture supporting the disciplines of art and architecture. Since it separate- ly describes the work and the image of the work, it can be used or adapted to describe intangible cul- tural heritage, but this is not a practice. The same is the case with CDWA, which is also designed to describe works of art and material culture of her- itage, primarily for the art museum community. In contrast, MODS like the Dublin Core metadata standard is used to describe different types of digital objects.

By reviewing the types of digital objects that the presented metadata standards describe, it is evident that the selected Dublin Core and MODS metadata standards can be used for the processing of intan- gible cultural heritage, which is illustrated by the metadata records of Jumps from the Old Bridge in Mostar.

- What metadata elements does the standard contain?

The Dublin Core metadata standard consists of fif- teen elements. The CCO content standard consists of nine groups of description elements. VRA Core contains nineteen elements along with sub-elements and attributes, including global attributes. CDWA consists of about 540 elements/categories and sub- categories. MODS consists of twenty elements that have their own sub-elements and attributes.

It is obvious that the CDWA metadata standard contains the largest number of elements. MODS by number of elements has one more than VRA Core which has nineteen, and five less than Dublin Core. CCO has the least number of elements. All elements of the listed metadata standards are presented in more detail in the above chapter of the paper, and

210

nematerijalnu kulturnu baštinu zbog specifičnosti izazova iscrpnosti njenog opisa koja ne sadrži fi­zički, to jest materijalni opis resursa, za razliku od materijalne baštine.

- Kakav je opseg podataka?

Dublin Core standard metapodataka pruža metapo- datke koje se mogu proširiti kvalifikatorima kako bi se dobio složeniji informacijski opis izvora. CCO pruža podatke kroz obavezne elemente opisa. Do­djeljujući zapisu ostale elemente opisa skupina koje nudi standard, pruža se veoma detaljan opseg poda­taka objekta. VRA Core strukturni standard meta- podataka sadrži više generičke elemente za kulturni materijal koji u cijelosti opisuje resurs. CDWA pu­tem elemenata / kategorija daje minimalne podatke, a uz opis potkategorija daje veoma detaljan opseg podataka. MODS standard metapodataka kroz ele­mente, podelemente i atribute daje detaljan opis digitalnog objekta te mu se daje prednost naspram Dublin Core standarda zbog kapaciteta koji nudi bogatiji opis.

Primjetno je da cijeli korpus standarda metapoda- taka može ponuditi opsežne podatke o resursu koji opisno obrađuje, a odluku o iscrpnosti podataka koji se nude donosi implementator, odnosno institucija, rukovodeći se svojim ciljevima i principima te po­trebama korisnika.

- Kakva je sintaksa metapodataka?

Metapodatke Dublin Core moguće je implemen­tirati u različitim formatima i jezicima za opsiva- nje. DC najčešće koristi HTML (Hypertext Mar- kup Language), te sheme XML (eXtensible Mar- kup Language)¹⁶ i RDF (Resource Description Framework).¹⁷ Resurs, kao i tehnologija koja se ko­risti za implementaciju, odredit će sintaksu Dublin Core standarda metapodataka. CCO XML sintaksa se prilagođava potrebama elementa opisa objekta koji se katalogizira. Vodič CCO preporučuje da se pojmovi zabilježe dosljedno, jasno, prirodnim pu­tem, a ne obrnuto, gramatički ispravno te da se ne koristi interpunkcija, osim crtica po potrebi. VRA Core je izražen u XML sintaksi. VRA Core sadrži strukturu pravila za korištenje metapodataka ele­menata. Iako je CDWA konceptualni okvir, CDWA definira samo oznake kategorija i definicije - ne

Ibričić

with the number of their own sub-elements and their attributes they contain, they give a description of the resource they process. The importance of the num- ber of metadata elements contained in the standards is reflected in the scope of the data and the compre- hensiveness of the description of the resource they describe. This is especially important for intangible cultural heritage due to the specificity of the chal- lenge of exhaustiveness of its description, which does not contain a physical, i.e. material description of resources, unlike material heritage.

The Dublin Core metadata standard provides meta- data that can be extended with qualifiers to provide a more complex informational description of the resource. CCO provides data through mandatory description elements. By assigning to the record other elements of the group description offered by the standard, a very detailed scope of the object’s data is provided. The VRA Core metadata structur- al standard contains multiple generic elements for cultural material that fully describe the resource. CDWA provides minimum data through elements/ categories, and with the description of subcategories it provides a very detailed range of data. The MODS metadata standard provides a detailed description of a digital object through elements, sub-elements and attributes, and is preferred over the Dublin Core standard due to its capacity to offer a richer descrip- tion.

It is noticeable that the entire corpus of metadata standards can offer extensive data on the resource it descriptively processes, and the decision on the completeness of the data offered is made by the im- plementer, i.e. the institution, guided by its goals and policies, and the needs of users.

Dublin Core metadata can be implemented in a va- riety of formats and annotation languages. DC most often uses HTML (Hypertext Markup Language), and schemas XML (eXtensible Markup Language)¹⁶ and RDF (Resource Description Framework).¹⁷ The resource as well as the technology used for imple- mentation will determine the syntax of the Dublin Core metadata standard. The CCO XML syntax adapts to the needs of the object description element

¹⁶ More about Dublin Core XML Schemas at: Dublin Core: XML sche- mas to support the Guidelines for implementing Dublin Core™ in XML. The Dublin Core Metadata Initiative.https://www.dublincore. org/schemas/xmls/.

¹⁷ More about Dublin Core RDF Schemas at: Dublin Core: DCMI Me- tadata expressed in RDF Schema Language. The Dublin Core Meta- data Initiative.https://www.dublincore.org/schemas/rdfs/.

211

BOSNIACA 2024; 29: 189-220

definira specifičnu sintaksu za njihovo kodiranje, iako smjernice CDWA predlažu relacionu struktu­ru koja omogućava jednostavnu ponovnu upotrebu ovlaštenih zapisa (Riley, 2010b). Radi po principu da podatke implementira u softver institucije, te tako nudi informacije za prikaz koje korisnici lako čitaju i razumiju. MODS je zamišljen kao shema koja može predstavljati većinu semantike MARC-a (Riley, 2017: 206), a MODS izražava elemente u XML sintaksi. MODS daje XML strukturu i pravila s definicijama opisa elementima, podelementima i atributima.

Iako imaju određena pravila, sintaksu standarda me- tapodataka diktira digitalni objekt koji se obrađuje, što je u slučaju ovoga rada nematerijalna kulturna baština te njene specifičnosti, ali ujedno i imple- mentator te tehnologija koja se koristi.

Pokazatelje interoperabilnosti Dublin Corea čini jednostavnost implementacije skupa elemenata me- tapodataka i fleksibilnost na različite vrste resursa koji se opisuju. Izražavanje Dublin Core metapo- dataka HTML jezikom te XML i RDF shemama pokazuje semantičku interoperabilnost, dok sintak­tičku interoperabilnost pokazuje korištenje struktu- rirarnog DCMI skupa opisa. Stoga navedena kom­patibilnost formata i jezika omogućava integraciju DC standarda metapodataka u različite tehnologije, čime se omogućava interoperabilnost s drugim stan­dardima metapodataka.

CCO je napravljen s ciljem interoperabilnosti za­pisa s drugim standardima. Elementi koje pokriva odnose se na područja informacija u kataloškom za­pisu koji se mogu mapirati u različite skupove me- tapodataka kao što su VRA Core, CDWA i CDWA Lite (i, prema proširenju, na MARC i Dublin Core, i slično, jer se ti skupovi elemenata mogu mapirati na VRA i CDWA) (Baca et al., 2006: 1).

Prema tome, CCO se može implementirati ne samo na vlasničke Visual Resources Association i the Getty Foundation već i na druge standarde metapo- dataka. Poput CCO, i VRA Core koristi XML shemu radi interoperabilnosti i razmjene zapisa. Osim toga, mapiranja se vrše i sa shemama metapodataka:¹⁸ CDWA, CCO, CONA, CDWA Lite, VRA Core, MARC/AACR, MODS, Dublin Core, DACS, EAD i drugim. Iz ovoga, vidno je da je CDWA također

¹⁸ Više o mapiranju standarda metapodatka: Metadata Standards Cro- sswalk.https://www.getty.edu/research/publications/electronic_pu- blications/intrometadata/crosswalks.html.

being cataloged. The CCO guide recommends that terms be recorded consistently, clearly, naturally, not the other way around, grammatically correct, and that punctuation is not used, except for hyphens when necessary. VRA Core is expressed in XML syntax. VRA Core contains a rule structure for us- ing element metadata. Although CDWA is a concep- tual framework, it only defines category labels and definitions - it does not define a specific syntax for encoding them, although the CDWA guidelines sug- gest a relational structure that allows easy reuse of authority records (Riley, 2010b). It works according to the principle of implementing data into the insti- tution’s software, thus offering display information that users can easily read and understand. MODS is intended as a schema that can represent most of the semantics of MARC (Riley, 2017: 206), and ex- presses elements in XML syntax. MODS provides XML structure and rules with description defini- tions of elements, sub-elements and attributes.

Although they have certain rules, the syntax of metadata standards is dictated by the digital object being processed, which in the case of this paper is the intangible cultural heritage and its specificities, but also the implementer and the technology used.

The interoperability indicators of Dublin Core are the simplicity of implementing a set of metadata elements and the flexibility for different types of resources to be described. The expression of Dub- lin Core metadata in HTML and XML and RDF schemas demonstrates semantic interoperability, while syntactic interoperability is demonstrated by the use of the structured DCMI set of descrip- tions. Therefore, the specified compatibility of for- mats and languages enables the integration of DC metadata standards into different technologies, thus enabling interoperability with other metadata stand- ards. CCO was created with the goal of interopera- bility of records with other standards. The elements it covers refer to areas of information in a catalog record that can be mapped to various metadata sets such as VRA Core, CDWA and CDWA Lite (and, by extension, to MARC and Dublin Core, and the like, because those element sets can map to VRA and CDWA) (Baca et al., 2006: 1).

Therefore, CCO can be implemented not only with the proprietary Visual Resources Association and the Getty Foundation, but also with other metadata standards. Like CCO, VRA Core uses XML Schema for interoperability and record exchange. In addi-

212

Ibričić

interoperabilan s drugim standardima metapoda- taka. CDWA je mapiran u Cultural Objects Name Authority (CONA)¹⁹ i može se preslikati u druge standarde podataka.

CDWA se često kombinira sa standardima meta- podataka i modelima podataka. Također, prateći strukturu i pravila XML sheme, MODS je interope- rabilan s drugim standardima metapodataka, te je i dizajniran s tom potrebom u svrhu mapiranja zapisa iz MARC-a 21 prema MODS-u.

Prema svemu navedenom, svi predstavljeni stan­dardi metapodataka su interoperabilni. Za intero- perabilnost veliki značaj ima popularnost, odnosno prihvaćenost od različitih institucija i implemen- tatora obrade, kao i jednostavnost standarda, a o svemu tome će nadalje biti više riječi. Osim toga, interoperabilnost je važna zbog semantičkog weba i tehnologije zbog ponovne obrade, automatizacije i integracije metapodataka u različitim aplikacijama.

Dublin Core je najpopularniji standard metapodata- ka, što nije čudno budući da opisuje različite vrste resursa. U prilog tome ide i međunarodna podrška od strane World Wide Weba, IFLA-e i prihvaćenih standarda ISO, ANSI/NISO i IETF. CCO je među­narodno prihvaćen od strane raznih organizacija poput International Council of Museums (ICOM); izdat je od strane American Library Association (ALA), a uključen je kao standard za sadržaj poda­taka u NISO A Framework of Guidance for Building Good Digital Collections.²⁰ Danas standard podata­ka koriste širom svijeta umjetničke i arhitektonske škole, biblioteke, muzeji, arhivi i organizacije koje upravljaju informacijama o djelima kulturnog na­slijeđa i njihovim slikama i omogućuju im pristup. Registar implementacije je odabrana lista nekih in- stitucija²¹ koje su usvojile VRA Core (An introduc- tion to VRA Core, 2014: 1). Ovaj strukturni stan­dard metapodataka široko je prihvaćen u muzejima, bibliotekama i digitalnim repozitorijima. CDWA je također široko prihvaćen standard metapodataka, pogotovo u zajednici muzeja za koju je i kreiran, ali koristi se i u galerijama, arhivima, raznim kulturnim institucijama i informacijskim ustanovama, često u kombinaciji s drugim standardima metapodataka. Brojne digitalne biblioteke odlučile su se za MODS

tion to the above mapping, they are also performed with metadata schemes:¹⁸ CDWA, CCO, CONA, CDWA Lite, VRA Core, MARC/AACR, MODS, Dublin Core, DACS, EAD, and others. From this, it can be seen that CDWA is also interoperable with other metadata standards. CDWA is mapped to the Cultural Objects Name Authority (CONA)¹⁹ and can be mapped to other data standards.

CDWA is often combined with metadata standards and data models. Also, following the structure and rules of the XML schema, MODS is interoperable with other metadata standards, and was designed with that need in mind for the purpose of mapping records from MARC 21 to MODS.

According to all the above, all presented metadata standards are interoperable. Popularity, i.e. accept- ance by various institutions and processing imple- menters, as well as the simplicity of the standard, is of great importance for interoperability, and more will be said about all of this. In addition, interop- erability is important due to the Semantic Web and technology due to the reprocessing, automation and integration of metadata in different applications.

Dublin Core is the most popular metadata standard, which is not surprising since it describes different types of resources. This is supported by internation- al support from the World Wide Web, IFLA and ac- cepted standards ISO, ANSI/NISO and IETF. The CCO is internationally accepted by various organi- zations such as the International Council of Muse- ums (ICOM). It was issued by the American Library Association (ALA), and is included as a data con- tent standard in NISO’s A Framework of Guidance for Building Good Digital Collections.²⁰ Today, the data standard is widely used worldwide by art and architecture schools, libraries, museums, archives and organizations that need to manage and provide access to information about cultural heritage works and their images. The Implementation Register is a selected list of some of the institutions²¹ that have adopted VRA Core (An introduction to VRA Core, 2014: 1). This structural standard of metadata is

¹⁸ More on metadata standards mapping: Metadata Standards Cro- sswalk.https://www.getty.edu/research/publications/electronic_pu- blications/intrometadata/crosswalks.html.

¹⁹ CONA collects titles, attributions, depicted subjects, and other me- tadata about works of art, architecture, and cultural heritage, both existing and historical. CONA is affiliated with AAT, TGN, ULAN, and the Getty Iconography Authority (IA)... CDWA, 2022: 2.

²⁰ More at: NISO, 2007.

²¹ See: VRA Core: Implementation Registry.http://core.vraweb.org/ vracore_registry.html.

213

BOSNIACA 2024; 29: 189-220

radije nego Dublin Core zbog bogatog opisa digital­nog objekta koji nudi MODS. Registar implementa­cije MODS²² daje popis institucija i projekata koje ga koriste, a najveći broj korisnika su akademske i istraživačke biblioteke u Sjedinjenim Američkim Državama. Također, veoma često se koristi u biblio­tekama, arhivima, informacijskim i drugim ustano­vama širom svijeta.

Iz svega toga može se potvrditi da su prikazani stan­dardi metapodataka široko prihvaćeni.

Dublin Core standard je jednostavan za implemen­taciju zbog pružanja elementarnih informacija o re­sursu, što ne zahtijeva dublju analizu i vrijeme od strane implementatora. CCO vodič navodi da me­toda katalogiziranja koju pruža može biti složenija zbog alata, upravljačkog sistema i tehnološke infra­strukture, kao i samog objekta, ali da su deskrip- torski elementi opisa jednostavni za katalogiziranje. Budući da pruža jasnu strukturu i elemente metapo- dataka, implementacija VRA Core je jednostavna, ali može biti i kompleksna, u zavisnosti od resursa i potreba institucija. CDWA je strukturni standard koji je jednostavan za implementaciju iz razloga što nudi strukturne upute za opis resursa. Isti je slučaj i sa MODS standardom metapodataka.

Generalno, svi standardi su jednostavni za imple­mentaciju ukoliko postoji znanje, vještine te volja za potrebom cjeloživotnog učenja informacijskih stručnjaka, odnosno implementatora, što se poseb­no odnosi na prilagođavanje tehnologiji i specifič­nim potrebama koje iziskuje digitalni objekt koji se obrađuje, odnosno opisuje.

Dublin Core standard metapodataka kroz elemente opisa metapodataka pruža osnovu za zaštitu podata­ka pružajući informacije o pravima u resursu i nad resursom izdavaču, to jest subjektu odgovornom za stavljanje resursa na raspolaganje, a zatim izvoru, odnosno povezanom resursu iz kojeg je izveden opisani resurs. CCO standard ne upravlja sigurno­šću i zaštitom podataka. Skupovi opisa koje nudi čak ne sadrže ni elemente koji osiguravaju neku vr­stu zaštite. Na implementatorima CCO standarda je da provedu odgovarajuće mjere sigurnosti i zaštite privatnosti podataka objekta. Potpuno isto se odno­si i na VRA Core standard metapodataka. CDWA

widely accepted in museums, libraries and digital repositories. CDWA is also a widely accepted meta- data standard, especially in the museum communi- ty for which it was created, but it is also used in galleries, archives, various cultural institutions and information institutions, often in combination with other metadata standards. Many digital libraries have opted for MODS over Dublin Core because of the rich digital object description that MODS offers. The MODS Implementation Registry²² provides a list of institutions and projects that use it, and the largest number of users are academic and research libraries in the United States of America. Also, it is very often used in libraries, archives, information and other institutions around the world.

From all the above, it can be confirmed that the pre- sented metadata standards are widely accepted.

- Is the standard easy to implement?

The Dublin Core standard is easy to implement because it provides elementary information about the resource, which does not require deep analysis and time on the part of the implementer. The CCO Guide states that the cataloging method it provides may be more complex due to the tools, management system and technology infrastructure, as well as the object itself, but that the descriptive elements of the description are easy to catalog. Because it provides a clear structure and metadata elements, the imple- mentation of VRA Core is simple, but it can also be complex depending on the resources and needs of the institutions. CDWA is a structural standard that is easy to implement because it offers structural in- structions for describing resources. The same is the case with the MODS metadata standard.

In general, all standards are easy to implement if there is knowledge, skills and the will for the need for lifelong learning of information experts, i.e. im- plementers, which especially refers to adaptation to technology and specific needs required by the digi- tal object being processed or described.

- How does the standard manage security and data protection?

The Dublin Core metadata standard through meta- data description elements provides a basis for data protection by providing information about rights in and over the resource, to the publisher, i.e. the en- tity responsible for making the resource available, then to the source, i.e. the associated resource from which the described resource is derived. The CCO

²² See: MODS, 2022c.

214

Ibričić

standard kroz smjernice, odnosno kategorije 22. Autorska prava / Ograničenja i 23. Vlasništvo / Po­vijest prikupljanja nudi osnovu za sigurnost i zaštitu podataka, ali, kao što je već spomenuto, na insti­tucijama je da provedu potrebne sigurnosne mjere zaštite. Poput CCO i VRA Core, isti je slučaj i s MODS standardom metapodataka.

Uzimajući u obzir sve to, vidno je da Dublin Core i MODS standardi metapodataka sadrže elemente i podelemente s atributima za metapodatkovnu obra­du koja može ponuditi dosljedne i specifične me- tapodatke za kulturne objekte koji sadrže elemente ili su oblik i pojava nematerijalne kulturne baštine. Da su Dublin Core i MODS standardi metapoda- taka primjenjivi za metapodatkovnu obradu nema­terijalne kulturne baštine pokazuju i primjeri dobre prakse ustanova kulture u Evropi i svijetu, što uz iznesenu prihvaćenost standarda daje konkretniju sliku u kontekstu zaštite i očuvanja nematerijalne kulturne baštine. Najpoznatiji primjer dobre prakse metapodatkovne obrade Dublin Core standardom metapodataka je zasigurno Europeana,²³ digitalna platforma evropske kulturne baštine koja od nema­terijalne kulturne baštine metapodatkovno obrađuje tradicionalne običaje, prakse, muziku, ples, zanate i usmeno naslijeđe. UNESCO inicijativom Memory of the World Register²⁴ baštini također tradicional­ne plesove, festivale i obrede. Primjeri dobre prak­se biblioteka su Digital Public Library of America (DPLA)²⁵ sa zapisima tradicionalnih pjesama ame­ričkih Indijanaca te British Library s projektom Save Our Sounds²⁶ koji baštini snimke narodne muzike i priče iz različitih dijelova Velike Britanije. Vrijedi spomenuti i digitalni arhiv The Digital Repository of Ireland (DRI)²⁷ koji baštini irsku narodnu muzi­ku i tradicionalne običaje, potom španski digitalni agregator pod nazivom Hispana koji baštini zbirke o flamenco muzici i španskim narodnim običajima te digitalnu platformu Nacionalne biblioteke Australi­je pod nazivom Trove²⁸ koja sadrži zbirke aboridžin- skih pjesama i priča. S obzirom na bogatu kulturnu baštinu, ustanove kulture u regionu također se ističu s primjerima dobre prakse metapodatkovne obrade nematerijalne kulturne baštine Dublin Core stan­dardom metapodataka. Tako Nacionalna i univer-

²³ Vidjeti: Europeana.https://www.europeana.eu/en.

²⁴ Vidjeti: UNESCO Memory of the World Register.https://www.unes- co.org/en/memory-world/register2023.

²⁵ Vidjeti: Digital Public Library of America (DPLA).https://dp.la/.

²⁶ Vidjeti: The British Library: Saving our Sounds.https://music.britis- hcouncil.org/news-and-features/2023-01-30/british-library-saving- our-sounds.

²⁷ Vidjeti: Digital Repository of Ireland. Home.https://dri.ie/.

²⁸ Vidjeti: Trove. Home.https://trove.nla.gov.au/.

standard does not govern security and data protec- tion. The sets of descriptions it offers do not even contain elements that provide some kind of protec- tion. It is up to the implementers of the CCO stand­ard to implement appropriate security and data pri- vacy protection measures of the facility. The exact same applies to the VRA Core metadata standard. The CDWA standard through guidelines i.e. catego- ries 22. Copyright/Restrictions and 23. Ownership/ Collection History offers a basis for data security and protection, but as already mentioned, it is up to the institutions to implement the necessary security protection measures. Like CCO and VRA Core, the same is the case with the MODS metadata standard.

Considering all the above, it can be seen that the Dublin Core and MODS metadata standards contain elements and sub-elements with attributes for meta- data processing that can offer consistent and specific metadata for cultural objects that contain elements or are the form and appearance of intangible cultural heritage. That the Dublin Core and MODS metadata standards are applicable for the metadata processing of intangible cultural heritage is also shown by ex- amples of good practices of cultural institutions in Europe and the world, which, along with the accept- ance of the standards presented above, gives a more concrete picture in the context of the protection and preservation of intangible cultural heritage. The best-known example of good practice of metadata processing with the Dublin Core metadata standard is certainly Europeana,²³ the digital platform of Eu- ropean cultural heritage; which metadata processes traditional customs, practices, music, dance, crafts, and oral heritage from the intangible cultural her- itage. Through UNESCO’s Memory of the World Register²⁴ initiative, heritage also includes tradi- tional dances, festivals, and rituals. Examples of good library practice are the Digital Public Library of America (DPLA)²⁵ with recordings of tradition- al American Indian songs and the British Library with the Save Our Sounds²⁶ project, which inherits recordings of folk music and stories from different parts of Great Britain. It is also worth mentioning the digital archive The Digital Repository of Ireland (DRI),²⁷ which inherits Irish folk music and tradi-

215

BOSNIACA 2024; 29: 189-220

zitetska biblioteka Bosne i Hercegovine projektom Digitalne kolekcije²⁹ baštini tradicionalne pjesme koje potječu iz različitih dijelova BiH. Nacionalna biblioteka Srbije projektom Digitalna NBS³⁰ bašti­ni stare zapise narodnih pjesama, običaje i festivale iz različitih regija Srbije. Još jedan primjer dobre prakse iz Srbije je i digitalna zbirka zapisa narod­ne književnosti Biblioteke Matice srpske u Novom Sadu. Nacionalna i sveučilišna knjižnica u Zagrebu također baštini digitalne zbirke narodnih pjesama, plesova, običaja i festivala na području Hrvatske. Vođene istim ciljem zaštite i očuvanja, treba spo­menuti i digitalne zapise Narodne biblioteke Crne Gore “Đurđe Crnojević”, Makedonske nacionalne biblioteke “St. Kliment Ohridski” i Narodne bibli­oteke Albanije, kao primjere dobre prakse zaštite i očuvanja nematerijalne kulturne baštine Dublin Core standardom metapodataka.

Kada je riječ o metapodatkovnoj obradi nemateri­jalne kulturne baštine MODS standardom metapo- dataka u Evropi i svijetu, kao primjer dobre prak­se neminovno je navesti Europeanu, koja koristi MODS standard metapodataka za obradu videoza- pisa, audiozapisa, ali i fotografija. Veoma značajan primjer dobre prakse je projekt Australije pod nazi­vom AustLit: The Australian Literature Resource.³¹ Projekt predstavlja nacionalnu bio-bibliografsku baza podataka o australskoj književnosti koja kori­sti MODS standard metapodataka za kategorizaci­ju i metapodatkovnu obradu usmene književnosti, tradicionalnih priča i pjesama autohtonih zajednica. Postoji nekoliko primjera dobre prakse primjene MODS standarda metapodataka u bibliotekama. Tako se s digitalnim zbirkama nematerijalne kul­turne baštine izdvajaju Nacionalna biblioteka Nor­veške, de facto nacionalna biblioteka SAD-a, Kon­gresna biblioteka i Francuska nacionalna bibliote­ka s digitalnim portalom Gallica.³² U regionu, već spomenute Nacionalna i univerzitetska biblioteka Bosne i Hercegovine, Nacionalna biblioteka Srbije i Biblioteka Matice srpske primjenjuju MODS po­lja za povezivanje najčešće audiozapisa i videoza- pisa ili transkripta, dok se Nacionalna i sveučilišna knjižnica u Zagrebu nalazi na listi institucija koje implementiraju MODS standard metapodataka.

Na kraju, pretpostavka je da će ovo istraživanje poslužiti u daljnjim istraživanjima Dublin Core i

²⁹ Vidjeti: Digitalne kolekcije.https://kolekcije.nub.ba/.

³⁰ Vidjeti: Digitalna NBS.https://digitalna.nb.rs/.

³¹ Vidjeti: AustLit. The Australian Literature Resource.https://www. austlit.edu.au/.

³² Vidjeti: Gallica.https://gallica.bnf.fr/accueil/en/content/accueil- en?mode=desktop.

tional customs; then the Spanish digital aggregator called Hispana, which inherits collections on fla- menco music and Spanish folk customs, and the Na- tional Library of Australia’s digital platform called Trove,²⁸ which contains collections of Aboriginal songs and stories. Considering the rich cultural her- itage of cultural institutions in the region, they also stand out with examples of good practice of metada- ta processing of intangible cultural heritage with the Dublin Core metadata standard. Thus, the National and University Library of Bosnia and Herzegovina is inheriting traditional songs originating from dif- ferent parts of Bosnia and Herzegovina through the Digital Collection²⁹ project. With the Digital NBS³⁰ project, the National Library of Serbia inherits old records of folk songs, customs, and festivals from different regions of Serbia. Another example of good practice from Serbia is the digital collection of folk literature records at the Matica Srpska Library in Novi Sad. The National and University Library in Zagreb also owns a digital collection of folk songs, dances, customs, and festivals in Croatia. Guided by the same goal of protection and preservation, we should also mention the digital records of the National Library of Montenegro “Đurđe Crnoje- vić”, the Macedonian National Library “St. Kliment Ohridski” and the National Library of Albania, as examples of good practice in the protection and preservation of intangible cultural heritage with the Dublin Core metadata standard.

When it comes to metadata processing of intangible cultural heritage with the MODS metadata stand­ard in Europe and the world, it is inevitable to cite Europeana as an example of good practice, which uses the MODS metadata standard for processing videos, audio recordings, and photos. A very sig- nificant example of good practice is the Australian project called AustLit: The Australian Literature Resource.³¹ The project is a national bio-biblio- graphic database of Australian literature that uses the MODS metadata standard for the categorization and metadata processing of oral literature, tradition- al stories, and songs of Indigenous communities. There are several examples of good practice in the application of the MODS metadata standard in li- braries. Thus, with digital collections of intangible cultural heritage, the National Library of Norway, the de facto national library of the USA, the Library

216

MODS standarda metapodataka za obradu nema­terijalne kulturne baštine. Pogotovo, istraživanje bi potencijalno moglo biti korišteno kao vid potrebe za razvojem novih standarda metapodataka namijenje­nih isključivo za metapodatkovnu obradu nemateri­jalne kulturne baštine, što bi bibliotekama, arhivima i muzejima kao čuvarima znanja u praksi znatno po­moglo u zadaći zaštite i očuvanja nacionalnog iden­titeta metapodacima u digitalnom okruženju.

6. Zaključak

U nedostatku istraživanja koja se bave komparativ­nom analizom standarda metapodataka za obradu nematerijalne kulturne baštine, cilj rada bio je da se ponude standardi metapodataka koji će biti pri­mjenjivi za obradu takve vrste resursa. Prema tome, izvršena je analiza Dublin Core, CCO, VRA Core, CDWA i MODS standarda metapodataka.

Analiza odabranih standarda metapodataka pokaza­la je da su predstavljeni standardi visoko kvalitetni, ali da se od korpusa za obradu nematerijalne kul­turne baštine mogu koristiti Dublin Core i MODS standardi metapodataka. Pored toga, oba standarda se koriste za opisivanje različitih vrsta digitalnih objekata. Dublin Core kroz petnaest elemenata opi­sa pruža opis digitalnog objekta i obogaćujući ga svojim klasifikatorima može ponuditi strukturalni- ji opis. Za razliku od njega, MODS standard kroz dvadeset elemenata, podelemenata i atributa daje primarno bogatiji opis; zbog toga se daje prednost MODS naspram Dublin Core standardu metapoda- taka. Oba standarda se izražavaju u XML sintak­si, dajući strukture i pravila kroz definicije opisa elemenata i klasifikatora, odnosno podelemenata i njihovih atributa. Široka prihvaćenost standarda, pogotovo u bibliotekama, i njihova jednostavnost za implementaciju rezultirale su visokom interope- rabilnošću oba standarda metapodataka. Rezultat toga je metapretraga metapodataka kodiranih u Du- blin Core, odnosno MODS shemi metapodataka. Posljedično, to omogućava bolju pretragu i prona­laženje digitalnog objekta, što je i krajnji cilj stan­darda metapodataka: uz dobar opis olakšati organi­zaciju objekta na mreži. Kada je riječ o sigurnosti i privatnosti podataka, Dublin Core u odnosu na MODS osigurava osnovu njihove zaštite, ali teret obaveze zaštite zasigurno ostaje na instituciji kao implementatoru.

Analiza primjene Dublin Core i MODS standarda metapodataka na primjeru Skokova sa Starog mosta u Mostaru pokazuje da su standardi primjenjivi u metapodatkovnoj obradi. Njihovu primjenu potvr-

Ibričić

of Congress, and the French National Library with the Gallica³² digital portal stand out. In the region, the already mentioned National and University Li- brary of Bosnia and Herzegovina, National Library of Serbia, and Library of Matica Srpska use MODS fields to connect mostly audio recordings and vide- os or transcripts, while the National and University Library in Zagreb is on the list of institutions that implement the MODS metadata standard.

Finally, it is assumed that this research will serve in further research on Dublin Core and MODS metada- ta standards for the processing of intangible cultural heritage. In particular, the research could potentially be used as a form of need for the development of new metadata standards intended exclusively for the metadata processing of intangible cultural heritage, which would in practice significantly help libraries, archives, and museums as guardians of knowledge in the task of protecting and preserving national identity with metadata in the digital environment.

6. Conclusion

In the absence of research dealing with the compar- ative analysis of metadata standards for the process- ing of intangible cultural heritage, the work aimed to offer metadata standards that will apply to the processing of this type of resource. Therefore, an analysis of Dublin Core, CCO, VRA Core, CDWA, and MODS metadata standards was performed.

The analysis of the selected metadata standards showed that the presented standards are of high quality, but that Dublin Core and MODS metadata standards can be used from the corpus for the pro- cessing of intangible cultural heritage. In addition, both standards are used to describe different types of digital objects. Through fifteen description ele- ments, Dublin Core provides a description of a digi- tal object, which, by enriching it with its classifiers, can offer a more structured description. In contrast, the MODS standard primarily provides a richer de- scription through twenty elements, sub-elements, and attributes; this is why MODS is preferred over the Dublin Core metadata standard. Both standards are expressed in XML syntax, providing structures and rules through definitions of element descriptions and classifiers, or sub-elements and their attributes. Wide acceptance of the standards, especially in li- braries, and their ease of implementation resulted in high interoperability of both metadata standards. The result is a meta-search of metadata encoded in

³² See: Gallica.https://gallica.bnf.fr/accueil/en/content/accueil- en?mode=desktop.

217

BOSNIACA 2024; 29: 189-220

đuju i primjeri dobre prakse u ustanovama kulture u Evropi i svijetu. Međutim, analiza ukazuje i na to da postoji potreba daljnjeg istraživanja standarda me- tapodataka za obradu nematerijalne kulturne bašti­ne, te da bi ovaj rad mogao biti od velike koristi za istraživanja, ali i za razvoj standarda metapodataka za nematerijalnu kulturnu baštinu.

Na kraju, primjena Dublin Core i/ili MODS stan­darda metapodataka doprinijet će kvalitetnijem upravljanju izvorima na mreži od strane korisnika. Od potreba, koje funkcije metapodataka trebaju slu­žiti za opis predmetnog izvora, kao i infrastrukture institucije i uveliko znanja implementatora, zavisit će odluka o odabiru standarda metapodataka.

the Dublin Core or MODS metadata scheme. Con- sequently, it enables better search and retrieval of a digital object, which is the ultimate goal of a meta- data standard with a good description to facilitate the organization of the object online. When it comes to data security and privacy, Dublin Core about MODS ensures the basis of their protection, but the burden of the duty of protection certainly remains on the institution as the implementer.

Analysis of the application of Dublin Core and MODS metadata standards on the example of Jumps from the Old Bridge in Mostar shows that the standards are applicable in metadata processing. Their application is also confirmed by examples of good practice in cultural institutions in Europe and the world. However, the analysis also indicates that there is a need for further research into metadata standards for the processing of intangible cultural heritage and that this work could be of great use for research, but also for the development of metadata standards for intangible cultural heritage.

Finally, the application of Dublin Core and/or MODS metadata standards will contribute to better management of online resources by users. Starting from the needs of which functions metadata should serve to describe the source in question, as well as the infrastructure of the institution and the extensive knowledge of the implementer, the decision on the selection of metadata standards will depend.

218

Ibričić

Bibliografija / Bibliography

AustLit. The Australian Literature Resource. https://www.austlit.edu.au/.

Bosna i Hercegovina, Državna komisija za saradnju sa UNESCO-m. Preliminarna lista nematerijalne kul­turne baštine Bosne i Hercegovine.http://unescobih. mcp.gov.ba/konkursi/?id=15125

Cataloging Cultural Objects (CCO). Visual Resources Association.https://www.vraweb.org/cco.

Digital Public Library of America (DPLA).https://dp.la/.

Digital Repository of Ireland. Home.https://dri.ie/.

Digitalna NBS.https://digitalna.nb.rs/.

Digitalne kolekcije.https://kolekcije.nub.ba/.

Dublin Core: DCMI Metadata Terms. The Dublin Core Metadata Initiative.https://www.dublincore.org/ specifications/dublin-core/dcmi-terms/.

Dublin Core: XML schemas to support the Guidelines for implementing Dublin Core™ in XML. The Dublin Core Metadata Initiative.https://www.dublincore. org/schemas/xmls/.

Europeana.https://www.europeana.eu/en.

Gallica.https://gallica.bnf.fr/accueil/en/content/accue- il-en?mode=desktop.

Giannoulakis, S., Tsapatsoulis, N., & Grammalidis, N. (2018). Metadata for Intangible Cultural Heritage - The Case of Folk Dances. Proceedings of the 13th International Joint Conference on Computer Vision, Imaging and Computer Graphics Theory and Appli- cations (VISAPP 2018).https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/323635642_Metadata_for_Intan- gible_Cultural_Heritage_-_The_Case_of_Folk_ Dances.

i-Treasures: intangible cultural heritage of the past available through advanced modern technologies. European Commission.https://digital-strategy.

ec.europa.eu/en/news/i-treasures-intangible-cultur- al-heritage-past-available-through-advanced-mod- ern-technologies.

Metadata Standards Crosswalk.https://www.getty.edu/ research/publications/electronic_publications/intro- metadata/crosswalks.html.

O’Neill, B., & Stapleton, L. (2022). Digital cultural her- itage standards: from silo to semantic web. AI & So- ciety: Journal of Knowledge, Culture and Commu- nication 37(37), 891-903.https://doi.org/10.1007/ s00146-021-01371-1.

219

BOSNIACA 2024; 29: 189-220

The British Library: Saving our Sounds.https://music. britishcouncil.org/news-and-features/2023-01-30/ british-library-saving-our-sounds.

Transforming Intangible Folkloric Performing Arts into Tangible Choreographic Digital Objects. Europe- an Commission.https://cordis.europa.eu/project/ id/691218/en.

Trove. Home.https://trove.nla.gov.au/.

UNESCO Memory of the World Register.https://www. unesco.org/en/memory-world/register2023.

VRA Core 4.0 Element Description.https://www.loc.gov/ standards/vracore/VRA_Core4_Element_Descrip- tion.pdf.

VRA Core.https://www.loc.gov/standards/vracore/.

Wholodance: Whole-Body Interaction Learning for Dance Education.http://www.wholodance.eu/.

Wijesundara, C., & Sugimoto, S. (2018). Metadata model for organizing digital archives of tangible and intan- gible cultural heritage, and linking cultural heritage information in digital space. LIBRES 28(2), 58-80.https://doi.org/10.32655/LIBRES.2018.2.2.

220