In an attempt to take care of the whole variety of needs, it seems that we want
  - volume, part, etc. as types
  - enumeration for those who need to designate levels
  - captions, for those cases when there are specific captions that matter
(teil) and that you might wish to display
  - titles, for those parts or sections that do have distinct titles

All of these have practical applications, and not all will be available in
the metadata that you are working with. This seems to give us the
flexibility that Suzanne needs, and should work well with the citations
that Bruce has in hand.

kc

At 11:43 AM 5/5/2003 -0400, you wrote:
>Well, my example of titles was used to try to make it clear - but my titles
>of the main work, the volume titles, and the part titles actually have
>unique Titles and not just descriptive numbering. I just didn't want to bog
>down the list with names of beetles.
>
>The problem with the language attribute thing is that I use English for my
>records even if it is a German book. I would use the German title etc. but
>use English subject headings, etc. I want to be able to "transcribe" the
>teil information right so that if some one is citing my source would get the
>right information (or if someone is going from a citation could find this
>source). *But* not have the person doing the input to have to think "Oh,
>'teil' is part" - they can just copy what they see <type ="teil"> value = 2
>or what have you.
>
>My real example that might help in clarifying what I am trying to do:
>
>Over all set title: Insecta. Coleoptera.
>Volume 4 is pretty generically refered to as Coleoptera
>Volume 4 part 2 is titled Heteromera
>Volume 4 part 3 is title Rhynchophora...
>I want to embed in the marked up text of each of these parts their title.
>And in the relatedItem field hook them up as siblings and related up to
>their Host.
>
>I don't want to guess how people might cite these things, I just want to
>give them the information parsed enough so that they can formulate it anyole
>way they want to.
>
><title>Insecta. Coleoptera</title>
> <partNumber type=volume> 4</partNumber>
> <partName>Coleoptera</partName>
> <partNumber type=part>3</partNumber>
> <partName>Rhynchophora...</partName>
>
>The citation style sheet of choice from the user could decide to abbreviate
>volume to v. or to vol. or spell the whole darn thing out and I wouldn't
>care. They could choose to put the vol and part numbers together and all
>the part names together or separate them out. Again, I wouldn't care. I
>just need to make sure they can pick and choose and arrange the pieces
>parts.
>
>Right?
>
>Should I be surrounding each of these into one title field? So that the
>structure of the names work since I do have three levels?
><title> Insecta. Coleoptera
> <partName>Coleoptera
> <partName>Rhynchophora</partName>
> </partName>
></title>
>
> - - Suzanne
>
>
> >>> [log in to unmask] 05/05/03 11:29AM >>>
>On Monday, May 5, 2003, at 10:23 AM, Suzanne Pilsk wrote:
>
> > I want to do the following for just the MODS record for that Part 1 of
> > Volume 2 but feel it isn't quite kosher:
> > <titleInfo>
> > <title>My Mulitvolume Book</title>
> > <partNumber type="volume"> 2</part number>
> > <partName>Second volume in two parts</partName>
> > <partNumber type="part">1</part number>
> > <partName>Part 1 of 2 volumes of my multivolume book</partName>
> > </titleInfo>
>
>Just discussing this elsewhere. I'm not totally sure about how to
>integrate titles here (parts and chapters of books generally have
>them), and so will leave that alone, but how about something like this
>(I've substituted a more generic name for Karen's proposed subDoc)?
>
><partDesc>
> <detail type="volume"><number>2</number></detail>
> <detail type="part"><number>1<number></detail>
></partDesc>
>
>Also, wouldn't your <partName> example really be a description?
>
> > This way if I have volumes that are actually Teils or Hefts or
> > something, I
> > could use that in the type value and have a style sheet of some sort
> > be able
> > to take that value and formulate some sort of citation.
>
>Right. There also needs to be a way to map these language-based
>structural names back to the language specific Schema. In other words,
>we need a way to separate out the structural information from the
>(language based) presentation. If, for example, "teil" is just a
>German word for part, then I think that needs to be accounted for in a
>MODS record. So rather than simply having:
>
><partDesc>
> <detail type="teil"><number>1</number></detail>
></partDesc>
>
>...maybe it'd be:
>
><partDesc>
> <detail type="part"><number>1</number></detail>
></partDesc>
>
>...and it would be understood to be a transliterated German word by
>virtue of the fact that the language information was coded somewhere
>else in the record. This becomes important if you are dealing with
>documents in a variety of languages, and in turn need to publish in a
>variety of languages.
>
>Say, for example, I download a MODS record at some future date from an
>online catalog in Germany, but want to cite it in for English audience?
>
>Bruce

*********************************************
Karen Coyle [log in to unmask]

            http://www.kcoyle.net
**********************************************