LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST Archives

ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST@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

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST  May 2006

ARSCLIST May 2006

Subject:

Re: National Recording Preservation Board (NRPB) Study

From:

steven c <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Sat, 13 May 2006 23:42:49 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (94 lines)

See end...
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jon Noring" <[log in to unmask]>
> I totally agree that there needs to be a single schema that melds
> discographical data with collection catalog data. There is a lot of
> overlap between the two realms, and having a common schema for both
> will benefit discographical research and aid in the cataloging of
> sound recording artifacts.
>
> Working with database developers is a good idea, preferably "open
> source" rather than commercial, but commercial is fine so long as
> there is a total commitment by the developer to implement the open
> standard XML discographical/cataloging schema, both for importing and
> exporting. If the commercial vendor resists full import/export support
> of the open standard XML discographical schema, then they should be
> replaced by someone who will gladly do it right (personally, whoever
> does it should open source their codebase -- I'm working with a
> commercial company in the ebook sector which is gladly *open sourcing*
> their codebase -- they have come up with a business model where open
> sourcing *their* codebase is a good thing for them.)
> 
> We *must not* go down the totally proprietary road.
> 
> I recommend that the open standard XML discographical schema be
> developed within OASIS, with ARSC teaming up with other entities such
> as LoC, OCLC, the Open Content Alliance (OCA, administered by Brewster
> Kahle and his Internet Archive), California Digital Library, academia,
> various discographical experts (of course), and maybe some recording
> and song composition organizations (the latter to assure linkage of
> discographical data with song/composition databases.)
> 
> It is likely that the effort, if done in OASIS, will attract several
> sharp XML and open source database wonks to the effort who otherwise
> would not join if the effort is done in a cloistered environment. It
> is important that the schema design be cross-fertilized from other
> areas of the digital media world (text, video, etc.) to assure that
> what is developed will mesh with digital repositories of other content
> so they may be seamlessly inter-connected. We no longer live in a world
> where digital content is segregated by type -- the future is for all
> digital content (and related metadata) to be interlinked in a
> powerful, synergistic way.
> 
First, a brief explanation of one of my comments:

I said that there was a difference between discographic and cataloguing
databases (the former would be more common for ARSC listeners). A
catalog database refers to specific individual copies of a phonorecord,
and as such must provide information concerning the copy held by the
cataloguing party (price paid, specific location and possibly internal
identification code, condition, any damage, usw.) along with such
discographic data as is desired. OTOH, a discographic database provides
data general to any and all copies of a phonorecord (catalog number,
matrix number, credits *as they appear on the label*, takes known,
actual artist data if known, usw. Note that a catalog database, if
made publicly available (via the Internet, usually) can serve as
a discographic data source to the extent that is included.

As far as Jon's further comments, I defer to him, since these get
into areas where I lack experience and knowledge. What I was thinking
of (try to figure out how to end THAT clause with other than a
preposition...?) was a cataloguing database which could be made
available, possibly through ARSC, to anyone who wanted it...as
freeware or very inexpensively. It would also have to have a
user interface that was essentially intuitive, since the
objective (to me) would be to accumulate an archive of as
much phonorecord data as possible which could eventually
lead to an "ultimate database" of nearly all phonorecords
that still exist.

Admittedly, since these early analog recordings are almost
the opposite of computers and digitized data, there will be
collections that aren't...and probably never will be...entered
into a computer-based digital database. However, the RDI was
conceived as a sort of "ultimate database" which was based on
several large collections of phonorecords...while it encountered
difficulties due to the state of the digital art as its 
conception, I tend to think it could be accomplished in
this era of 500GB hard drives...in fact, the objective
of the (I hope temporarily) sidetracked Project Gramophone...
that being to create an archive of the contents of every
known 78rpm recording as sound files...is becoming more
practical/possible as I type! I estimate about three
million, give or take, 78's were issued...almost all
double-sided...so we need six million 3-minute sound
files (I'm not allowing for the fact that some recordings
showed up on as many as 20 labels!). Assume 1MB each, and
we need six terabytes of storage (or 6 500GB drives, or
about $2000 worth). Here again, I defer to the experts...
but I feel this is something worth debating/discussing
here on ARSCLIST...?!

Steven C. Barr
(who can provide data on about 40,000 of 'em...)

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

November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 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
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
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager