LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for EAD Archives


EAD Archives

EAD Archives


[email protected]


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Monospaced Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

EAD Home

EAD Home

EAD  January 2002

EAD January 2002

Subject:

Re: component notes

From:

Gina Minks <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

[log in to unmask]

Date:

Wed, 30 Jan 2002 17:10:26 -0600

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (115 lines)

Hi Bill and all,

After responding to Stephanie and then reading the other responses
(especially Bill's initial response), I am beginning to wonder if my answer
tends to be specific to the types of finding aids that I have been encoding.
Would the use of <abstract> be different at an item level as opposed to a
folder level? In Stephanie's case, she is referring to/describing multiple
contents of the folder where at the item level I am summarizing the item.
For example:

<unittitle> Allen, Jay. > "Simon." <unitdate>14 Aug 1937.</unitdate>
</unittitle>
  <abstract>My dear Simon: An introduction for Ernest Hemingway is most
certainly not necessary. . .</abstract>
  <physdesc>TLS, 1s.</physdesc>

(Again these are legacy finding aids that are being encoded.) I also don't
think that I was very clear when I wrote that I tend to think of
<scopecontent> as "prose" - I think I was thinking of prose to be a complete
thought that could stand on its own. The description of it in the tag
library leads me to think of <scopecontent> as something more substantial
and informative than what I am including in my <abstract>.

Any and all responses welcome!!
-Gina

Gina L. B. Minks
Special Collections Librarian
McFarlin Library - University of Tulsa
2933 E. 6th
Tulsa OK 74104-3123
[log in to unmask]
tel: 918-631-3133
fax: 918-631-5022

-----Original Message-----
From: Encoded Archival Description List [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of
Bill Landis
Sent: Wednesday, January 30, 2002 4:30 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: component notes


Gina Minks wrote:

> I think
> the key for me between using <abstract> and <scopecontent> is that the tag
> library definition for <scopecontent> states "a prose statement". The
> "stuff" in our item level description isn't prose and isn't the same kind
of
> info that we include in the series scope and content. .
.hence...<abstract>.
> Let me know if you would like an example!

Fascinating discussion and very interesting to see the ways that colleagues
make decisions about elements of archival description. While I certainly see
the reasoning behind Gina (and others') decision to use <abstract> for these
extraneous descriptive notes at the file or item levels, I guess this is one
area where I think the EAD TL does a real disservice to the archival
community in its vagueness, and where I think we need to turn to more
established descriptive standards for help in determining what to do.

The real problem is that we tend to think (at least in the US with our
descriptive inventory and MARC-centric background) of things like
<scopecontent> only in terms of use at higher, aggregate levels of
description like collection and series. ISAD(G) clearly weighs in that
elements of archival description are available for use at any level of
description. So what would <scopecontent> look like at the file or item
level? Certainly wouldn't be as long or involved as when describing higher
levels of aggregation like collection or series. Or put another way, a prose
statement can be a short sentence as easily as it can be a couple of long
paragraphs.

The bottom line for me is that it seems useful to look at existing standards
for guidance and none of our existing standards (ISAD(G), APPM, RAD) define
an element called abstract. So I would have a problem using EAD's <abstract>
*in place of* <scopecontent>, or <unittitle> or <bioghist> for that matter
(all elements defined in all three of the standards mentioned above). As a
succinct summary of existing <scopecontent> and/or <bioghist> at the same
level of description it seems fine, and we use it that way. But we're only
using it when a more informative archival description element exists at the
same level of description to provide more information to the end user.

We have lots of legacy finding aids with funny little half sentences tagged
on to the file level descriptions. My tactic when encountering these while
working on a legacy encoding project is to make them into real sentences
that do what file-level scope and content notes are supposed to do, which
according to RAD (the only one of the standards above that actually deals
with descriptive elements at the file and item levels) is to "give
information on the subject matter, the time period, and the geographical
area to which [the file] pertains." The examples that Stephanie originally
sent:

Correspondence, 1945-1967 (includes letters from Henry Miller)
Correspondence, 1968-1980 (includes signed photographs of the artist)

do just that. Putting the word "File" in front of each and a period at the
end turns them, IMHO, into dandy file-level scope and content notes.

As far as display is concerned, if you're outputting an online version of a
container list it should be relatively easy for a stylesheet to test for
<c0x level> attributes of "file" or "item" and to ignore the <p> tags and
append this information to the <unittitle> and <unitdate> so that it
displays the way we're used to seeing it in our legacy print finding aids.

Bill

--
| Bill Landis
| Manuscripts Librarian, Special Collections and Archives
| The UCI Libraries, University of California
| P.O. Box 19557, Irvine, CA 92623-9557
| 949 824.3113 Voice | 949 824.2472 Fax
| [log in to unmask]

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

March 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
October 1998
September 1998
August 1998
July 1998
June 1998
May 1998
April 1998
March 1998
February 1998
January 1998
December 1997
November 1997
October 1997
September 1997
August 1997
July 1997
June 1997
May 1997
April 1997
March 1997
February 1997
January 1997
December 1996
November 1996
October 1996
September 1996
August 1996
July 1996
June 1996
May 1996
April 1996
March 1996
February 1996
December 1995

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager