Please excuse if this is a duplicate mailing.
> Replying with the benefit of reading Dennis Meissner's message, it would
> seem that Dublin Core is more appropriately applied to the finding aid
> itself. Here are some of my related questions:
> Is there any consensus in practice regarding mapping or would anybody
> even argue that there's a need for consensus here?
> If Dublin Core is used only within <eadheader> the resulting "record"
> seems mighty brief. If this metadata is primarily for web retrieval of
> some sort does the metadata match the needs for this sort of retrieval
> (searching, harvesting).
> I have seen some finding aids represented online in HTML rendering using
> the standard frames layout. Some institutions place meta tags mapped to
> Dublin Core within the HTML coding for the home frame page. The set of
> Dublin Core elements are usually more inclusive in these cases, sometimes
> including indexing terms and other metadata outside the scope of
> <eadheader>. In cases where I am able to see the originating XML document
> I don't see Dublin Core mapping so I want to know if the coding is being
> done by hand on the frame.html page or if it is being generated in some
> way from the XML document.
> And, on this same issue, is this a short term fix if the intention is to
> be able to mount our XML documents directly on the Web in the future when
> browser capabilities allow?
> How do you see Dublin Core mapping within finding aids being utilized?
> --On Tuesday, January 24, 2006 4:48 PM -0600 "Fox, Michael"
> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> The question raised regarding mapping turns on another question. In
>> your Dublin Core record, are you describing the finding aid (if so map to
>> <eadheader>) or are you describing the collection (if so map to <ead> or,
>> more precisely, to <archdesc> elements)?
>> Michael Fox