On Friday, December 5, 2003, at 10:27 AM, Karen Coyle wrote:
> If we want the genre element in MODS to include any genre from any
> metadata, then it should be a text field, not a controlled list. A
> controlled list only makes sense if you have some reason to keep
> control, i.e. there's some particular meaning to the list that you
> want to see violated.
Of course, controlled lists - plural -- is the compromise, I suppose.
Let me lay out my problem:
I am involved in helping out with what advice I can offer in a few
things related to MODS, the most significant of which are:
1) An xslt-based citation formatting engine. It takes XML metadata,
and formats it based on an XML style specification.
2) A conversion tool to move data from Endnote, Reference Manager and
BibTeX to MODS, and back.
Genres become significant in both circumstances, partly because people
are used to thinking in particular ways (for example, style specs are
usually genre-based more-or-less), and partly because genres sometimes
do matter for formatting. For example, a legal article is formatted
differently than a regular academic journal article.
So, my argument with respect to the style spec is that it ought to be
based on two methods of categorization.
1) structural "classes": monograph, partInMonograph, partInSerial
2) genre "types"
So, each class has a generic definition, and then there are optional
genre-specific definitions, which will be necessary in some cases.
This is why the genre values matter: for data and formatting
Here's a schematic of my proposed style spec (missing a lot of detail)
that might illustrate:
<dc:creator>Modern Language Association</dc:creator>
<dc:description>blah, blah, blah</dc:description>
<intext beforesep="(" aftersep=")">
<container beforesep="In ">
<subtitle beforesep=": "/>
<date type="month" renderas="numeric"/>