Thanks Rebecca.
I guess since I am generating the content required, I can generate it into a
parseable format (e.g. "name=xxx; email=yyyy;" etc.), so no new elements are
required.
Thanks!
Steve
Stephen Thomas,
Senior Systems Analyst,
University of Adelaide Library
UNIVERSITY OF ADELAIDE SA 5005 AUSTRALIA
Phone: +61 8 830 35190
Fax: +61 8 830 34369
Email: [log in to unmask]
URL: http://www.adelaide.edu.au/directory/stephen.thomas
CRICOS Provider Number 00123M
-----------------------------------------------------------
This email message is intended only for the addressee(s) and contains
information that may be confidential and/or copyright. If you are not the
intended recipient please notify the sender by reply email and immediately
delete this email. Use, disclosure or reproduction of this email by anyone
other than the intended recipient(s) is strictly prohibited. No
representation is made that this email or any attachments are free of
viruses. Virus scanning is recommended and is the responsibility of the
recipient.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Metadata Object Description Schema List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
> Behalf Of Rebecca S. Guenther
> Sent: Saturday, 24 March 2007 8:12 am
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [MODS] Embargo dates?
>
> You can put who submitted/edited the metadata under recordContentSource,
> although it doesn't parse anything. It has an authority defined, which is
> optional, and migh contain the name/code of an organization list and the
> value of the element might be an organization code/identifier. But since
> authority is optional and can be a string, you could put someone's name
> and any additional information about them in recordContentSource like
> contact information. But if you needed it parsed into name, email, phone,
> etc., obviously it doesn't do that now. Would you need to do anything with
> the information that would justify additional elements?
>
> Rebecca
>
> On Fri, 23 Mar 2007, Steve Thomas wrote:
>
> > My question related to embargo of the material described, not to the
> record
> > itself. Sounds like 3.3 has the answer, thanks!
> >
> > Regarding recordInfo, I also need to store the details of people who
> submit
> > or edit metadata. It seems to me that frecordInfo is the logical place,
> but
> > it doesn't contain any suitable element for recording name, email, phone
> > etc. Right now I'm using extension. Are there any plans in this
> direction?
> >
> >
> > Cheers!
> > Steve
> >
> >
> > Stephen Thomas,
> > Senior Systems Analyst,
> > University of Adelaide Library
> > UNIVERSITY OF ADELAIDE SA 5005 AUSTRALIA
> > Phone: +61 8 830 35190
> > Fax: +61 8 830 34369
> > Email: [log in to unmask]
> > URL: http://www.adelaide.edu.au/directory/stephen.thomas
> > CRICOS Provider Number 00123M
> >
> > -----------------------------------------------------------
> > This email message is intended only for the addressee(s) and contains
> > information that may be confidential and/or copyright. If you are not
> the
> > intended recipient please notify the sender by reply email and
> immediately
> > delete this email. Use, disclosure or reproduction of this email by
> anyone
> > other than the intended recipient(s) is strictly prohibited. No
> > representation is made that this email or any attachments are free of
> > viruses. Virus scanning is recommended and is the responsibility of the
> > recipient.
> >
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Metadata Object Description Schema List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
> > > Behalf Of Karen Coyle
> > > Sent: Friday, 23 March 2007 1:01 am
> > > To: [log in to unmask]
> > > Subject: Re: [MODS] Embargo dates?
> > >
> > > I read the first post as a need to embargo the MARC record. Isn't
> access
> > > condition about access to the material described? The former would be
> > > administrative information about the record, the latter is part of the
> > > record's description of the resource.
> > >
> > > kc
> > >
> > > Ray Denenberg, Library of Congress wrote:
> > > > Version 3.3, coming soon, will add extension capability to
> > > > <accessCondition>. So you'll be able to do essentially what
> Ashley
> > > > suggests, but you don't have to do it within <extension>, you'll be
> > > > able to do it within <accessCondition>.
> > > >
> > > > --Ray Denenberg
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > *From:* Ashley Sanders <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> > > > *To:* [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> > > > *Sent:* Thursday, March 22, 2007 4:27 AM
> > > > *Subject:* Re: [MODS] Embargo dates?
> > > >
> > > > Steve Thomas wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I want to record embargo information in a MODS record, but I
> > > > can't see in
> > > > > the spec. that there's provision for this. What I have in mind
> > > > is something
> > > > > like:
> > > > >
> > > > > <accessCondition>
> > > > > Not to be opened until Christmas!
> > > > > </accessCondition>
> > > > >
> > > > > with
> > > > >
> > > > > <dateAvailable>
> > > > > 2007-12-25
> > > > > </dateAvailable>
> > > > >
> > > > > But ideally one would want to link these two together by
> > > > wrapping them in
> > > > > another element. Also "dateAvailable" is not, AFAIK, a defined
> > > > element in
> > > > > MODS.
> > > > >
> > > > > Does anyone have any useful pointers on how embargo dates
> might
> > > > be managed?
> > > >
> > > > Put them in the MODS extension element (it allows you to put
> > > anything
> > > > inside it), eg:
> > > >
> > > > <mods>
> > > > .....
> > > > <extension>
> > > > <st:embargo>
> > > > <st:accessCondition>Not to be opened until
> > > > Christmas!</st:accessCondition>
> > > > <st:dateAvailable>2007-12-25</st:dateAvailable>
> > > > </st:embargo>
> > > > </extension>
> > > > </mods>
> > > >
> > > > It might be wise to add your own elements in your own namespace,
> > > > hence the
> > > > st: prefix.
> > > >
> > > > Ashley.
> > > > --
> > > > Ashley Sanders [log in to unmask]
> > > > <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> > > > Copac http://copac.ac.uk A MIMAS Service funded by JISC
> > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > -----------------------------------
> > > Karen Coyle / Digital Library Consultant
> > > [log in to unmask] http://www.kcoyle.net
> > > ph.: 510-540-7596
> > > fx.: 510-848-3913
> > > mo.: 510-435-8234
> > > ------------------------------------
> >
|