blog post 3: metadata and databases

Writing Schema from The Orlando Project: Tagsets 

     Metadata is described in this chapter as being the content within an organizational method. Databases are the systems within which metadata can be organized. In both of these chapters, the phrase "intellectual labor" was used to describe the work which is done in order to sort metadata into databases and tagsets, and to organize systems of classification, taxonomy, or ontology. I appreciate that Drucker used this word choice, because it brings to the reader's mind, in my opinion, the idea of "background word" into clearer conception. As mentioned, the job of creating metadata cannot always be done digitally or through a computer, so in many cases, a human must do this work. Additionally, Drucker notes that "Computers cannot tolerate ambiguity" (Drucker 67). In order to create metadata that provides an accurate substitute for the material it represents, it must include the range of ambiguity and interpretation that many humanistic works allow. 

    Chapter 4 references, as an example, The Orlando Project (shown in the screenshot above). The Orlando Project "focuses on gender and other aspects of cultural formation, and it emphasizes the intellectual, material, political, and social conditions, including writing by men, that have, over time, helped to shape writing by women. These, and many other considerations, have determined the Orlando Project’s schemas, tagsets, and DTDs. These are the encoding systems that are the fundamental link between the textbase content and its digital delivery." When considering the work of categorizing or creating a database of writings by female authors, the focus of this categorization must be considered. Drucker notes that "No classification system is value neutral, objective, or self-evident. All classification systems bear with them the ideological imprint of their production" (Drucker 57). This provision does not exclude the creators of the Orlando Project. As evident through their tagset, they evaluate literature through many different lenses, but although they explore many aspects, there are surely more viewpoints left unnoticed by nature of the projects' focus. As I learn about metadata, The Orlando Project serves as a helpful indicator of what metadata can look like, how it can be constructed, and what its restrictions can be. 

    The description of databases involves much more technological language and use of programs, which I find more difficult to understand and conceptualize. However, I found Drucker's explanations of what data is at the beginning of Chapter 5 to be both insightful and understandable. I found Drucker's claim that "Data does not exist in the world" (Drucker 70) to be incredibly interesting. In most peoples' minds, including my own, data is inexorably linked to subjects like math or science, which did exist in the world before humans discovered them. Thus, I associated data with concepts like math or science- more rigid, uncreative, and objective. However, by defining data as something that must be created and defined by humans, and that does not already contain parameters, data becomes something that can also be linked to humanistic practices- something that is more creative, fluid, ambiguous, or even artistic. Through this definition, I can more clearly link and understand the connection between digital computation and humanities research, as well as the role that metadata and databases play in the intersection between these two components.