It would be good to settle on one term. I just added "handwritten" to
the note types list because of a formal request from Wolfram, but that
could be changed to "inscription" if people agree that that is a better
term. The two seem to be describing the same thing.

Rebecca

>>> Rhonda Marker <[log in to unmask]> 1/13/2010 2:56 PM >>>
We have been using the note type="inscription" for a handwritten note
on 
a work. I'd also be interested in hearing what note types others have 
given this sort of thing.

Rhonda Marker
http://rucore.libraries.rutgers.edu 

Rebecca S Guenther wrote:
> Dear Wolfram:
>
> What will you be recording here? Will you be transcribing the
> handwritten note on the work?
> In MARC we might put something like this in field 562 (Copy and
Version
> Identification Note). See examples under:
> http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd562.html 
> We would use subfield $a (Identifying markings) for this sort of
> annotation on the piece.
> There is a MODS note type equivalent to this:
> "version identification".
>
> Since the note types are not enumerated in the schema, if that is
not
> specific enough for your needs, you can use another note type. Of
course
> the list of note types is provided so that there is consistency
among
> MODS applications. We can certainly add to this list to document
what
> people are using. Possibilities might be "handwritten" or
"annotation"
> if "version identification" is too broad.
>
> You can let us know if you want something added-- if others have had
> this same need and have defined their own note type, that would help
to
> determine which term to use.
>
> Rebecca
>
> Rebecca S. Guenther                                                  
 
>   
> Senior Networking and Standards Specialist                  
> Network Development and MARC Standards Office     
> Library of Congress   
> 101 Independence Ave. SE                                             
 
>                                       
> Washington, DC 20540-4402                                          
> (202) 707-5092 (voice)    
> (202) 707-0115 (FAX)           
>  [log in to unmask] 
>
>   
>>>> "Zieger, Wolfram" <[log in to unmask]> 1/12/2010 5:18 AM >>>
>>>>         
> Dear MODS experts,
> We’ve got a lot of original materials of artists which used to put
> some short handwritten notes on their works.
> I think it would be nice to encode this as "note".
> But what type would be sufficient here?
> I think it should be "source note". This type is on the "official"
list
> at <http://www.loc.gov/standards/mods/mods-notes.html> .
>
> So an example would be 
>
> <note type="source note">
> 	I am not sure about this...
> </note>
>
> I am unsure if "source note" is right, because the meaning of
"source
> note" could also be interpreted different than "handwritten" (like a
> note about the source we've got it from).
>
> Of course I could define it by myself and put it like <note
> type="handwritten"> - but I want to be as close as possible to the
> official MODS declaration.
>
> But maybe there is a better approach than "note" for this kind of
> thing?
>
> So what would you suggest to encode handwritten remarks within MODS?
>
> Thanks a lot,
> Wolfram Zieger
>
>
>
> Wolfram Zieger
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> IT Struktur Support
>
> Kunsthistorisches Institut in Florenz - Max-Planck-Institut 
> Via Giuseppe Giusti 44
> 50121 Firenze
> Italia
>
> Tel:    +39 055-2491 159
> e-mail: [log in to unmask] 
> web:    www.khi.fi.it 
>
> KHI-intern: 
> - Telefon:  259
> - Standort: Büro im Anschluss an Bereich S (Photothek)
>