On Fri, 2004-06-04 at 07:03, Andrew E Switala wrote:

> Alternatively, types common to both schemata could be abstracted into a
> type library that MODS and MADS import.

I, too, was bothered by the references in MADS to MODS -- since they
could be used independently of each other. I can see various advantages
to the above solution. Basic elements like name and title could be
building blocks, and a schema like MODS could add attributes or other
elements that would fulfill the "MARC-like-ness" while someone else
could extend the schema for other metadata uses. It would give us some
commonality of elements without our having to create a metadata format
that meets all needs.

--
-------------------------------------
Karen Coyle
Digital Library Specialist
http://www.kcoyle.net
Ph: 510-540-7596 Fax: 510-848-3913
--------------------------------------