Do a review of the Obligations for each field

[karenmajewicz]

This chart https://opengeometadata.org/docs/ogm-aardvark shows which fields are Required, Recommended, Optional, or Conditional. We should perform a review of those fields, especially in light of recent discussions of the Publisher field (#18) and the importance of spatial extent.

We might want to reconsider how to indicate which fields are required for the interface to work and which ones we think are needed to make the record useful.

[kgjenkins]

Determine what is required for GBL to actually function ("minimal record"), and what are suggested for GBL community standards.

[rmseifried]

Minimal record: see https://github.com/OpenGeoMetadata/metadata-issues/issues/49 - @karenmajewicz confirmed that only ID and Access Rights are required for GBL to work.

Community standard / strongly recommended fields: still TBD. From discussion during the community sprint: consider reserving the language of "required" for the GBL documentation pages, and use some other word (like "strongly recommended") on the OGM site to separate software functionality from community standard recommendations

[rmseifried]

Just saw the "metadata scoring rubric" (appendix A) in Battista et al. 2018 (https://doi.org/10.31229/osf.io/kp5r6). Perhaps a helpful resource?

[karenmajewicz]

related issue: https://github.com/OpenGeoMetadata/metadata-issues/issues/47

[karenmajewicz]

This is a relevant part of the GBL documentation that has details on how each field functions in GBL: https://geoblacklight.org/docs/metadata/#metadata-functionality-in-geoblacklight-4x