LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for MODS Archives


MODS Archives

MODS Archives


MODS@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

MODS Home

MODS Home

MODS  July 2008

MODS July 2008

Subject:

Re: Locally created thesauri for subject and/or genre (MARC or MODS)

From:

"Rebecca S. Guenther" <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Metadata Object Description Schema List <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Thu, 17 Jul 2008 09:12:45 -0400

Content-Type:

TEXT/PLAIN

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

TEXT/PLAIN (71 lines)

An easier thing to do (for now) as we are working on the registry (which
will also work in MARC), is to just apply for a source code to name your
vocabulary/thesaurus. Just send an email to [log in to unmask] with the
details-- name of the thesaurus and URI and any publication details if
applicable. Then a code is assigned and it could be used in $2 and in the
MODS authority attribute. As we continue to develop the registry that Clay
mentioned we will provide URIs for the source codes as well as values
within any controlled lists that LC is maintaining. And we plan to discuss
the inclusion of URIs in MARC for controlled values as part of the MARC
Advisory Committee discussions at ALA to accommodate RDA, the new
cataloging rules.

Rebecca

On Wed, 16 Jul 2008, Clay Redding wrote:

> Hi Laura,
> 
> Good timing.  I'm working on a registry driven by SKOS [1] that will feature resolvable URIs for values (or Concept labels, as I call them) commonly found in existing LC schemas, such as PREMIS, MODS and MARCXML.  MARC too, of course.  One of the goals is to then allow new values to be placed into the registry for possible inclusion into any relevant schemas.  In theory these schemas could be then dynamically generated at request time with the relevant values that exist in the registry, but that has yet to be decided by those here in the NetDev office or the various boards that guide our schemas.  It will be possible to register values in the registry but not have the affect the XML Schema outputs, though.
> 
> The registry will also have numerous other outputs for each value, including MADS, many flavors of RDF, etc.  I'll likely have some query endpoints up for it too, for SPARQLs and XQueries.
> 
> You're right, that then in a MODS instance, you'll need a convention to get at the values in the registry.  The values will either be built into the schema, or you'll have to use something like @xlink:href to process the URI, and an XInclude/XPointer/XQuery or the like to generate the proper text node for your <genre>.  Also, in theory, the @authority values could use the URI for the SKOS ConceptScheme that contains the Concept label of interest.  
> 
> e.g. (these won't resolve for another couple of weeks):
> 
> <genre authority="http://www.loc.gov/standards/registry/vocabulary/graphicMaterials" xlink:href="http://www.loc.gov/standards/registry/vocabulary/graphicMaterials/tgm000008" xlink:title="A la poupeč prints"><!-- Your XML tools should generate "A la poupeč prints from TGMII id#tgm000006 --></genre>
> 
> Clay
> 
> >>> Laura Akerman <[log in to unmask]> 07/16/08 6:15 PM >>>
> I'm looking at how to set up one or more local (and idiosyncratic) 
> vocabularies that could be high-level subject or "genre" (best element 
> that fits) vocabularies, to describe special groupings we would want 
> (some guessed at examples,  "yellow-back collection" "pamphlets by 
> African American authors" "art history web resources").  These might be 
> for internal use or public (e.g. website naviation of collections).
> 
> We'd like to be able to identify which local vocabularies we're using in 
> our MODS and MARC records.  In MARC, the specification says to use a 
> term from the MARC Code list in subfield 2; the only one available to us 
> is "local".  The MODS guidelines for authority attribute for both 
> subject and genre suggest using the MARC Code lists but don't prescribe it.
> 
> We'd like to go beyond "local" so we can code more than one local 
> vocabulary. 
> 
> Am thinking  about inventing a convention, something like , e.g., 
> <mods:genre authority="local GEU projectvocab">  to assign our own 
> abbreviation or label for a local vocabulary.  
> 
> Has anyone else felt the need to do something like this, or tried it... 
> do you think this strategy would work, see any problems with it, or have 
> suggestions for an alternative strategy?
> 
> Beyond my immediate need: would a change in either the conventions for 
> use of the MARC codes for genre or subject, or the data structure to 
> permit identifying institution and local vocabulary code, be a good thing?
> 
> Thanks in advance for advice,
> 
> Laura
> 
> -- 
> Laura Akerman, Technology and Metadata Librarian
> Robert W. Woodruff Library, Room 128
> Emory University
> Atlanta, Ga. 30322
> ph:  (404) 727-6888  / email:  [log in to unmask]
> 

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

October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
June 2019
May 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 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
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 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
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager