LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for METS Archives


METS Archives

METS Archives


METS@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

METS Home

METS Home

METS  May 2005

METS May 2005

Subject:

Re: Descriptive metadata in METS question

From:

Brian Tingle <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Metadata Encoding and Transmission Standard <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Thu, 26 May 2005 17:26:04 -0700

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (81 lines)

Hi Robert,

The multiple dmdSec approach seems to be more common than a
custom-schema-combining-elements-from-many-schemas approach.

If you want to be clear that all the dmdSec's relate the the object as a
whole rather than parts of the object, you can link them all to the root
div in the structMap.

<mets>
  <dmdSec ID="DMD1"><mdWrap><xmlData>...</xmlData></mdWrap></dmdSec>
  <dmdSec ID="DMD2"><mdWrap><xmlData>...</xmlData></mdWrap></dmdSec>
  <dmdSec ID="DMD3"><mdRef/></dmdSec>
  ...
  <structMap><div DMDID="DMD1 DMD2 DMD3"/></structMap>
</mets>

You could do this in both the complimentary and crosswalk cases you
mention.  I don't think there is really a way to differentiate those two
cases in METS.

Combining elements from different namespaces together in one mdWrap is
possible, but that is probably trickier to get to validate, because you
need a "wrapper" schema for the root element inside of the <xmlData>
that sets up all the namespaces/schemas you will be using inside of the
record.  However, I believe MODS, for example, has some mechanism to
bring in extension elements from other namespaces/schemas.  You could
have and RDF record in the dmdSec/mdWrap that combines elements from
several namespaces/schemas.

-- Brian Tingle

On Thu, 2005-05-26 at 16:07, Robert Tansley wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I have a question about the best way to embed some descriptive metadata in
> METS.  It may be as much a plain XML question as a METS question.
>
> First, some background:  I have a project in China that is connecting
> DSpaces together (sharing/mirroring content and metadata) using METS (1.4)
> over OAI-PMH, with content included via reference (i.e. a URL that the
> DSpace doing the mirroring can retrieve).
>
> The metadata requirements of the project aren't fulfilled by Dublin Core
> alone.  Every item has a few core Dublin Core fields, and there are various
> categories of object, each with some extended (non-DC) elements.
>
> The question is, would it be useful to include the Dublin Core in its own
> <dmdSec>, and have the extended metadata (with a separate XML schema) in a
> separate <dmdSec>?  My initial suspicion was that having separate <dmdSec>s
> would be useful because:
>
> - Easier to do XML schema validation on each.  Is this true?  It's certainly
> possible to 'mix' elements from different namespaces in a single <mdWrap>,
> but I'm not sure of the implications for validation (which is pretty
> important for this project I think.)
>
> - Other systems that don't understand the extended metadata can at least use
> the Dublin Core.  Though perhaps a separate dmdSec wouldn't make much
> difference here, if the other system can pick out the understood elements
> from the one <dmdSec>?  However I can see that a simple, general METS
> profile might just be "METS with DC in a dmdSec", which means that our
> project would conform to that (as well as our own more specific profile, of
> course).
>
> I'm also wondering whether the presence of two <dmdSec>s could confuse
> people.  Both <dmdSec>s relate to the object as a whole, rather than an
> individual file or group of files.  Also, they are complementary.  That is,
> in order to get all the descriptive metadata about the object, you need the
> contents of both; this is a different situation to where one dmdSec is a
> crosswalk of the other (e.g. where one <dmdSec> has Dublin Core, and another
> has "the same" metadata crosswalked into MODS).  Does the presence of two
> <dmdSec>s imply or suggest anything?  Or is it purely up to the particular
> profile/use of METS?
>
> I guess I'm just wondering whether there is a best practice or any advantage
> to one approach over the other.  Any comments welcome...
>
>  Robert Tansley / Digital Media Systems Programme / HP Labs
>   http://www.hpl.hp.com/personal/Robert_Tansley/

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

December 2021
November 2021
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
July 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
July 2018
June 2018
April 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
January 2017
October 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
January 2016
September 2015
August 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
January 2014
December 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
February 2013
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
June 2012
May 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
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
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
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

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager