LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for MODS Archives


MODS Archives

MODS Archives


MODS@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

MODS Home

MODS Home

MODS  November 2003

MODS November 2003

Subject:

Re: referenced works?

From:

Karen Coyle <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Metadata Object Description Schema List <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Sat, 29 Nov 2003 12:57:37 -0800

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (72 lines)

So now that I have the context, it seems to me that the structure of the
related works (i.e. 773 in MARC, relatedItem in MODS) would work. What
you would need is a type attribute on the relatedItem that says
something like Type=quotedIn (which I see as being slightly different to
References). Since the types give the meaning of the related item (host,
suceeding entry, etc.) we'd need to come up with a short phrase that
gives the hosting item's role -- nothing good comes to mind at the
moment.

It still feels different to me than, say, the relationship between a
book and a chapter, or an article and the journal issue. But
structurally there are lots of similarities.

kc

On Sat, 2003-11-29 at 10:59, Bruce D'Arcus wrote:
> On Nov 29, 2003, at 1:31 PM, Karen Coyle wrote:
>
> > IsReferencedBy is a bit trickier, because while you may have one item
> > in hand that references your document, you have no idea how many
> > others are out there, nor how many will be created in the future. So
> > there is no concept of "completeness" for that aspect of your
> > metadata.
>
> Yes, this is (mostly) citation-oriented no doubt.  In my case, I'd use
> it when I want to quote from a work that is itself a quote.  The
> citation might be (Smith 1953: 34; quoted in Jones 2000: 44).
>
> To give more context, the proposal to improve citation support in
> DocBook has been tentatively approved.  The Technical Committee asked
> us to figure out if their suggestion of a compromise would work for
> citation in the humanities, so I've been testing it out.  Examples like
> these prove difficult.
>
> A simple citation in the new model would be:
>
> <citation><biblioref linkend="smith1953" unit="page"
> start="34"/></citation>
>
> Likewise, I could do this:
>
> <citation><biblioref linkend="smith1953a" unit="page" start="34"/>;
> quoted in <biblioref linkend="jones2000c" unit="page"
> start="44"/></citation>
>
> What Peter Flynn was suggesting (with his DocBook example) would move
> the association logic into the record itself.
>
> So say we are dealing with two books.  There'd be the main record (the
> Smith 1953), and a relatedItem "referencedBy" (the Jones 2000).  I
> don't understand how the secondary page number would be picked up, but
> Peter seems to think it doable, such that the citation would only in
> fact point to the original source (as in my first example above).
>
> > Not to say that MODS couldn't morph into this -- I haven't thought
> > about
> > that -- but it makes sense that you don't find it in MARC.
>
> Yes, it is indeed understandable why it's not in a library standard.
> As you also note, though, I could imagine it more comprehensively and
> broadly useful outside of personal bibliographic management and
> citation.
>
> Bruce
--
-------------------------------------
Karen Coyle
Digital Library Specialist
http://www.kcoyle.net
Ph: 510-540-7596 Fax: 510-848-3913
--------------------------------------

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

August 2019
June 2019
May 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 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
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 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

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager