The slack response above should remind you that having fields that won’t have interoperability with other systems is a good place to start with cutting off.
Anne Washington, Metadata Services Coordinator at University of Houston, was able to turn 8 fields to 2:
Now we have a single field for each: Creator and Subject
The specificity has been good for migration rework and adding terms to our local vocabulary, but now the relationships for those terms to related controlled vocabs are recorded in our local controlled vocabulary system, Cedar.
Finally, from Elliot D Williams at the University of Miami:
One of the areas that we are going to re-examine during our migration is digitization-related metadata. Our current metadata profile has several fields for the equipment and specifications that were used during digitization. However, we haven’t used them consistently. More importantly, that information is recorded elsewhere, as part of our digital projects recordkeeping. It doesn’t make sense to include it in a system that is primarily oriented towards display of digital content, rather than preservation or management, so we will likely be looking at removing those fields in the next iteration of our metadata profile.
Bridge2Hyku Partners UPDATES
metadata-remediation metadata-migration samvera-migration metadata