At 10:45 AM 12/6/2001 +0100, you wrote:
>Jerome McDonough schrieb:
> > While METS doesn't *insist* that you encode structure
> > within the structural map down to the page level of an
> > item, equally it doesn't forbid it.
>I see - well, but somehow this is just another kind of work-around. In
>the area of metadata storage METS is following a real good concept in
>separating Descriptive from Administrative Metadata.
>I think, METS should follow the same principles regarding the structure
>of a work.
>A printed work has always two separate strucutres: A logical structure
>(book, chapters, articles) and a physical structure (pages or even
>page-areas , columns etc...). You have two different kind of structures
>(as you also have two different kinds of metadata) - therefore it would
>be a much buetter solution to store them separatly.
I should have noted in my previous message that you can also have multiple
structural maps within a METS object, and that the 'TYPE' attribute on the
structmap element can be used to distinguish between a physical structMap
and a logical one. In fact, in the original MOA2 DTD, the TYPE attribute on
structMap used a controlled vocabulary of 'logical' and 'physical'. So,
METS already accommodates the notion of separate logical/physical structMaps
within one METS document. Sorry I didn't make that clearer earlier; I blame
it on the cold eating my frontal lobes....
[log in to unmask]
Digital Library Development Team Leader
Elmer Holmes Bobst Library, New York University
70 Washington Square South
New York, NY 10012