Is This Title Data, or Metadata?
OK, it's time to put the data/metadataData about data. Metadata provides a context for research findings, ideally in a machine-readable format. It enables discovery of data via an electronic interface, and correct use and attribution of findings. Related Guide question to bed, once and for all. You know the one:
Do we call that data, or metadata?
Usually the context is building a data system, and usually there is some hidden question, along the lines of "Should we put the results in this part of the system, or over here in this other part?"
You would think, in a project called Marine Metadata InteroperabilityThe ability of two or more information systems to exchange metadata with minimal loss of information. Related Guide, we would have a good way to answer this question. Or at least we'd consider it really important and spend a lot of time on it.
Here's the dirty little secret: There Is No Difference. Data, Metadata, Tomayto, Tomahto. Whether it is data or metadata is entirely in the mind of the user: the data for one user is the metadata for another (and vice versa!).
And for the system designer, that isn't the right question anyway.
The right question for the designer to ask is, How should we manage this information? And usually the answer depends on a few things:
- How often does the information change?
- Who uses the information, and how often?
- What does the information relate to or describe?
Information that doesn't change over time usually gets put into the mental pot labeled metadata. What this means—in the real world of system design—is that it is stored in places that don't have to change or be updated, and are accessed much more slowly. Information that changes all the time, on the other hand, has to be handled much more efficiently and flexibly. And that difference is usually what people mean when they ask, "Should I treat this as data, or metadata?"
Information that the system's users want to see all the time probably is put into a place, and a form, that can be quickly accessed. But that design isn't affected by whether the information is 'data' or 'metadata'.
Information that relates to other information can always be called metadata, of course. But if my temperature measurement is related to your salinity measurement, does that mean the system designer should handle it in a different way? If that's the only difference, then it should almost always be handled the same way, with just one exception: The person who uses salinity will need a way to reference the related temperatures. So the system designer has to build in the ability to go from any one piece of information, to the other pieces of information that relate to it.
Ideally, any system user can easily get access to any of the system's information. Design your system to expose whatever information it contains, as well as the interrelated information, as effectively as it can. Then we don't have to spend any precious time discussing what we mean by 'metadata'.
