Hi, Miachael and everyone,
Well, for institutions for which media-based archival materials are important, following a content standard such as AMIM would lead to consistent descriptions, provide researchers with information regarding, e.g., playback (a 3/4-inch U-matic videocassette won't play in a 1/2-inch VHS cassette player), and gives folks who are preparing the descriptions an idea of what the heck to say about media materials they may not encounter very often. AMIM is listed as a source of descriptive information for moving image materials in DACS Appendix B (on companion standards). For someone who does want to follow the existing standard for moving image materials, there are EAD elements to hold this information. If a more detailed approach isn't desired in some institutions, the info could just be put into <physdesc>.
I do think media-based materials are important in archival collections, as important as text-based material. Over the years I've seen great inconsistency in the descriptions of sound recordings, graphic materials, and moving image items (and series and collections -- the rules and the EAD elements to hold the info could be used at any level of description). That's understandable given the great variety of formats and the scarcity of guidance on how to describe them. That's why several DACS companion standards projects are underway. For archives that would like guidance on this, those standards will hopefully be useful, but there are many institutions where resources and institutional focus would rule out the use of an additional standard or set of guidelines. Which is fine.
Just making a few suggestions for folks who might be interested.
Marsha
-----Original Message-----
From: Encoded Archival Description List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Fox, Michael
Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2010 5:23 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: phys-what?
Interesting theoretical discussion, but what exactly would one accomplish with all this content designation?
Michael Fox
Michael Fox
Deputy Director for Progams and Chief Operating Officer Minnesota Historical Society
345 Kellogg Blvd West
Saint Paul, MN 55102
[log in to unmask]
651-259-3110
-----Original Message-----
From: Encoded Archival Description List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Maguire, Marsha
Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2010 3:53 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: phys-what?
Hi, all,
Admittedly, I'm cribbing here to some extent from AMIM (American Moving Image Materials) rules for physical description of video recordings, although AMIM would put more info in the <extent> element, but how about something like:
<physdesc>
<extent>1</extent> <genreform>videocassette<genreform>
<physfacet>U-matic, sound, color</physfacet> <dimensions>3/4 inch</dimensions>
</physdesc>
Leave out "color" if the tape is black-and-white, of course! Just suggesting that sound and color characteristics are useful.
Duration is a problem in EAD. It's another way of stating extent in a way. Could <extent> be repeated after <genreform>?
<physdesc>
<extent>1</extent> <genreform>videocassette<genreform> <extent>(60 minutes)</extent>
<physfacet>U-matic, sound, color</physfacet>
<dimensions>3/4-inch</dimensions>
</physdesc>
Or the duration could follow the number of cassettes:
<physdesc>
<extent>1 60-minute</extent> <genreform>videocassette<genreform>
<physfacet>U-matic, sound, color</physfacet>
<dimensions>3/4-inch</dimensions>
</physdesc>
The tape width is important playback info, so I'd suggest including the dimensions element. The brand name of the tape, Scotch, might be more appropriate in a note, although you could precede "U-matic" with "Scotch."
Best,
Marsha
Marsha Maguire
Recorded Sound Cataloger
Motion Picture, Broadcasting, and Recorded Sound Division
Library of Congress, Packard Campus
Culpeper, VA 22701-7551
email: [log in to unmask]
Opinions are my own.
-----Original Message-----
From: Encoded Archival Description List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Giovanni Michetti
Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2010 1:58 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: phys-what?
Hi Michele,
here my comments:
1. <physdesc><extent>1 Scotch Umatic UCA 60 tape</extent></physdesc>
It's not a proper solution, since <extent> should be used for quantity only.
2. <physdesc><genreform>Scotch Umatic UCA 60</genreform></physdesc>
I don't like it. I wouldn't consider "Scotch Umatic" a type of material
-- I'd rather say it's a "videotape" from the <genreform> point of view.
In fact, looking at the examples in the Tag Library you'll find 'videotape', 'sound recording', 'drawing' etc.
OK, I guess we may consider it as a sort of synecdoche, as we use 'mp3'
to generically mean a (compressed) 'sound recording', but it seems we need to 'stretch' things too much.
Anyway, you may refine it adding <extent>:
<physdesc><extent>1</extent><genreform>Scotch Umatic UCA 60</genreform></physdesc>
3. <phystech><p>Scotch Umatic UCA 60</p></phystech>
It seems a good option.
Actually <phystech> "includes details of [their] physical composition or the need for particular hardware or software to preserve or access the materials" (Tag Library): so I'd note "Scotch Umatic" implies the need for a particular device but it's not per se information about that device. Anyway, I still think <phystech> is a good option.
4. <physdesc><physfacet type="format">Scotch Umatic UCA 60 videotape</physfacet></physdesc>
I don't like it: <physfacet> is about the "aspect of the appearance of the described materials". Of course "Umatic UCA 60" can be handled as 'appearance' but it doesn't seem the best option.
5. What about
<did>
...
<physdesc><extent>1</extent><genreform>videotape</genreform></physdesc>
...
</did>
<phystech><p>Scotch Umatic UCA 60</p></phystech>
?
Too redundant?
Giovanni Michetti
University of Rome "La Sapienza"
Il 07/12/2010 17.43, Michele R Combs ha scritto:
> What's the appropriate element combination to describe the specific type of audio or videorecording, e.g. Scotch Umatic UCA 60?
> <physdesc><extent>1 Scotch Umatic UCA 60 tape</extent></physdesc>
> <physdesc><genreform>Scotch Umatic UCA 60</genreform></physdesc>
> <phystech><p>Scotch Umatic UCA 60</p></phystech> <physdesc><physfacet
> type="format">Scotch Umatic UCA 60 videotape</physfacet></physdesc>
> These all seem about equally right to me. Thoughts?
> Michele
|