On Wednesday, May 7, 2003, at 11:37 AM, Suzanne Pilsk wrote:
> I apologize for being a bit thick. But I am trying to understand how to
> apply any of this to what I am working on.
I think this is just kind of tricky stuff, so I feel your pain.
> Would using the set ups as described below mean keying in this data in
> these elements as well as the standard mods fields? I do not want to
> to key in the same sort of data in more than one place.
I'm going to take a crack here, but I might be wrong. I think the
implication for your records is that you would have separate records
for each volume and, like I think you were intending, use the related
item element to tie them to the set record. But you might (??) need to
in turn have separate records for each part and tie them to the volume.
As I understand the new element (whether it's called citationInfo or
whatever), it refers to the citation-specific information for the main
title. So if my title is a journal article title, this new data refers
to that article, while the journal itself is relatedItem "host." And
if I start to think about this, it makes sense. Isn't your example
analogous to my wanting to cite more than one article from an issue of
a journal? Each article needs to be a separate record.
> I want to pull the citation information out with something like a style
> sheet of sorts from the data that is there.
This is what I want too.
> So I don't want a separate area to plug in the information but to
> parse it
> out of the basic data so it can be picked and pulled as needed.
> The first option below seems good but I really don't understand the
> <subDoc> field that surrounds it.
> The second one I don't quite understand where it would fit in since
> points out that some of the information will come from the full record
> other citation information will come from this sub area (?). The
> stored there isn't (in my view) a relatedItem but the item itself.
> And, yes, apparently I am confused about the term part or
> Could those fields be used under the <titleInfo> for the piece so that
> information can be pulled by some sort of request and formatted
> some style standard?
I'm pretty sure there's a reason this is a bad idea, but can't think of
it right now :-)