Sorry, was away yesterday and am now catching up with yesterday's discussion...
> One of Ray's earlier comments was that an attribute (such as the OBJID on
> the root METS element) wouldn't do as the place to put the unique
> identifier for the METS object. Do you still thank so? Because I agree
> that it's the logical choice, and that a METS/OAI archive should be able
> to deal with attributes as easily as it does elements.
OBJID is described as an identifier for the "original source document". Maybe I
don't understand what METS means by "original source document". But if it means
either (1) the object that the METS package pertains to, or (2) something
analogous to DC "source", then clearly this is not appropriate as an identifier
for the METS package. No?
Library of Congress
[log in to unmask]