Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Articulation with RiC : group together the different instantiations present in the institution #147

Open
2 of 9 tasks
BrigitteMichel opened this issue Aug 1, 2024 · 1 comment
Assignees
Labels
EAD major revision (EAD 4.0) This issue is part of the EAD major revision towards EAD 4.0 ead-archDesc This issue relates to the ead-archDesc module Review This is being reviewed in order to decide whether it will be implemented

Comments

@BrigitteMichel
Copy link

BrigitteMichel commented Aug 1, 2024

Creator of issue

  1. Brigitte Michel ([email protected])
  2. Abes (Agence bibliographique de l'enseignement supérieur = Bibliographic Agency of Higher Education)

The issue relates to

  • EAC-CPF schema issue
  • EAC-CPF Tag Library issue
  • EAD schema issue
  • EAD Tag Library issue
  • Schema issue
  • Tag Library issue
  • Suggestions for all schemas
  • Suggestions for all Tag Libraries
  • Other

Wanted change/feature

  • Text: EAD4 maintains the logic of a primary instantiation described in <physDesc> or <physDescSet> and secondary instances described separately from the primary instantiation in <formsAvailable>.
  • In fact, there is an ambiguity in the name <formAvailable> which could theoretically also concern the primary form of the documentary unit described in <physDesc> or <physDescSet>, while the current definition of <formsAvailable> limits its use to "other forms". This confusion is perpetuated by the word 'instantiation' in the definition of <formAvailable> (p. 109).

Suggested Solution

  • Text: More explicitly assume that the <formsAvailable> element groups together ALL instantiations (in the sense of RiC-E06), including the primary and mandatory instance. This would more easily ensure the unambiguous identification of the different instantiations.

Context

  • Text: Additionally, this would avoid separating the URI of a natively digital document accessible online from its description in <physDesc> (see example 2)
  • Example 1 (current EAD 4.0 draft)
<identificationData>
  <physDesc>(67 folders)</physDesc>
</identificationData>
<formsAvailable>
  <formAvailable>
    <p>Microfilm</p>
  </formAvailable>
  <formAvailable>
    <p>Online Content Selected photographs from the records of the National Woman's Party are available on the Library of Congress website "Women of Protest: Photographs from the Records of the National Woman's Party" 
      <reference  href="https://hdl.loc.gov/loc.mss/collmss.ms000004">(see http://hdl.loc.gov/loc.mss/collmss.ms000004).</reference>
    .</p>
  </formAvailable>
  <formAvailable>
    <p>Group I available on microfilm. Shelf no. 18,276</p>
  </formAvailable>
</formsAvailable>
  • Example 1 (proposition)
<formsAvailable>
  <formAvailable localType="original" id="Calames-202402015555_Inst1">
    <physDescSet>
      <physDescStructured>
        <quantity>37</quantity>
        <unitType>folder</unitType>
      </physDescStructured>
    </physDescSet>
  </formAvailable>
  <formAvailable localType="copie analogique" coverage="whole" id="Calames-202402015555_Inst2>
    <physDesc>1 microfilm</physDesc>
    <relations>
      <relation>
        <targetEntity valueURI="Calames-202402015555_Inst1"/>
        <relationType localType="copie" valueURI="RiC-R014i"/>
      </relation>
    </relations>
  </formAvailable>
  <formAvailable localType="digitalization" coverage="part" id="Calames-202402015555_Inst3 valueURI="https://hdl.loc.gov/loc.mss/collmss.ms000004">
    <p>Content Selected photographs are available on the Library of Congress website</p>
  </formAvailable>
</formsAvailable>

Note: during editing this post, @formType has been changed to @localType to concentrate on the grouping of instantiations as mentioned in this issue rather than introducing new attributes, which are not mentioned anywhere else in this issue only within the example encoding. The same goes for @ricId (a suggestion made in #150), which was used here in <relationType> and has been replaced by @valueURI.

  • Example 2 (digital material, current EAD 2002 encoding)
<c id="Calames-202402201115345671">
  <did>
    <unittitle>Montage sonore des enquêtes du corpus <emph render="italic">Chansons et danses populaires du Mont-Lozère</emph></unittitle>
    <unitdate era="ce" calendar="gregorian" normal="2006-12">2006-12</unitdate>
    <physdesc>
      <physfacet type="technique">1  fichier au format MP3</physfacet>
      <extent>Durée : 6h 04min 11s</extent>
    </physdesc>
  </did>
  <phystech><p>qualité sonore bonne.</p></phystech>
  <dao href="http://multimedia.mmsh.univ-aix.fr/phonotheque-2277 "/>
</c>
  • Example 2 (current EAD 4.0 draft)
<c id="Calames-202402201115345671">
  <identificationData>
    <unitTitle>Montage sonore des enquêtes du corpus <span style="italic">Chansons et danses populaires du Mont-Lozère</span></unitTitle>
    <unitDate era="ce" calendar="gregorian" standardDate="2006-12">2006-12</unitDate>
    <physDescSet>
      <physDescStructured id="fichier1">
        <quatity>1</quatity>
        <unitType>fichier</unitType>
        <physFacet localType="technique" localTypeDeclarationRefence="EADB_Physfacet">MP3</physFacet>
        <physFacet localType="duration" localTypeDeclarationRefence="EADB_Physfacet">6h 04min 11s</physFacet>
      </physDescStructured>
    </physDescSet>
  </identificationData>
  <physicalOrTechnicalRequirements>
    <p>qualité sonore bonne.</p>
  </physicalOrTechnicalRequirements>
  <formsAvailable>
    <formAvailable valueURI="http://multimedia.mmsh.univ-aix.fr/phonotheque-2277" target="fichier1"/>
  </formsavailable>
  <!-- Inconvéient : sépare la définition de l'URI de la description du fichier lui-meme alors qu'il s'agit du même fichier-->  
</c>
  • Example 2 (proposition)
<c id="Calames-202402201115345671">
  <identificationData>
    <unitTitle>Montage sonore des enquêtes du corpus <span style="italic">Chansons et danses populaires du Mont-Lozère</span></unitTitle>
    <unitDate era="ce" calendar="gregorian" standardDate="2006-12">2006-12</unitDate>
  </identificationData>
  <formsAvailable>
    <formAvailable valueURI="http://multimedia.mmsh.univ-aix.fr/phonotheque-2277">
      <physDescSet>
        <physDescStructured id="fichier1">
          <quatity>1</quatity>
          <unitType>fichier</unitType>
          <physFacet localType="technique" localTypeDeclarationRefence="EADB_Physfacet">MP3</physFacet>
          <physFacet localType="duration" localTypeDeclarationRefence="EADB_Physfacet">6h 04min 11s</physFacet>
        </physDescStructured>
      </physDescSet>
    </formAvailable>
  </formsAvailable>
</c>

Note: during editing this post, <formsAvailable> has been moved outside of <identificationData> to concentrate on the grouping of instantiations as mentioned in this issue rather than introducing a new structure for EAD 4.0, which is not mentioned anywhere else in this issue only within the example encoding.

@BrigitteMichel BrigitteMichel changed the title Articulaton with RiC : group together the different instantiations present in the institution Articulation with RiC : group together the different instantiations present in the institution Aug 2, 2024
@kerstarno kerstarno added Review This is being reviewed in order to decide whether it will be implemented ead-archDesc This issue relates to the ead-archDesc module EAD major revision (EAD 4.0) This issue is part of the EAD major revision towards EAD 4.0 labels Aug 2, 2024
@kerstarno
Copy link

This will be discussed by TS-EAS during their meeting on 12/13 August together with #115 and #126.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
EAD major revision (EAD 4.0) This issue is part of the EAD major revision towards EAD 4.0 ead-archDesc This issue relates to the ead-archDesc module Review This is being reviewed in order to decide whether it will be implemented
Projects
Status: Review
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants