LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for EAD Archives


EAD Archives

EAD Archives


EAD@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

EAD Home

EAD Home

EAD  May 2011

EAD May 2011

Subject:

Re: Distinction between analogue and digital archives in EAD

From:

Jane Stevenson <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Encoded Archival Description List <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Fri, 20 May 2011 09:51:35 +0000

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (164 lines)

Hi there,

Thanks for the responses.

Andre: its not really about how to describe digital materials. The Hub is an aggregator, so we can't dictate too much how our contributors catalogue. I really just want the potential to have a search on the Archives Hub that limits the descriptions to those that refer to digital archives. 

<altformavail> is useful for contributors to add certain information, but I really just want a radio button in our EAD Editor that they can check if the collection is digital - and I need this to implement some kind of EAD tagging. 

cheers,
Jane.



On 20 May 2011, at 03:25, André Kahlé_ wrote:

> I suggest reading the chapter 9 of the canadian Rules for Archival Description (RAD) which is devoted to the description of documents in elctronic format. http://www.cdncouncilarchives.ca/RAD/RAD_Chapter09_March2008.pdf
> 
> This document contains many examples. I am sure EAD users will be able to figure out how to use EAD to describe "born digital" documents since RAD fields are often quite similar to EAD fields.
> 
> You can also find RAD-EAD equivalencies (for a crosswalk) at the following address : http://www.cdncouncilarchives.ca/CrosswalkEN_Nov03.pdf
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Andre Kahle
> INFOKA
> http://www.infoka.com/archilog/en 
> 
> 
> 
> At 14:22 2011-05-19, you wrote:
>> We're currently playing around with using the <altformavail> note at different levels to note digital copies of analog av.  Of course, this would not be appropriate for "born digital" materials. 
>>  
>> At the collection level
>> <altformavail id="a17" encodinganalog="530">
>> <head>Alternative Forms Available</head>
>> <p>All of the sound recordings in this collection were digitized for research access in 2009-2010 and are available at the Archives of American Art offices.  Researchers may view the original reels for the archival notations on them, but original reels are not available for playback due to fragility. </p>
>> </altformavail>
>>  
>> We will also be incorporating this element at the series/subseries level.  Presently, we do not note digital copies at the folder/item level, only the original format in a <physdesc> note. Since we're trying to keep it as simple as possible, we've played around with using only one <physdesc> to describe both the original and any analog duplicates.  Our thinking is that it needs to be easy enough for all of our processing archivists to understand, rather than just one av specialist because av materials come in so many mixed collections.  
>>  
>> <c03><did>
>> <container type="box">5</container>
>> <container type="folder">35</container>
>> <container type=?item?>1</container>
>> <unittitle>Sam Adler interview, <unitdate>1967</unitdate></unittitle>
>> <physdesc>(1 side of 1 sound tape reel)</physdesc></did>    
>> </c03>
>>  
>> <c03><did>
>> <container type="box">5</container>
>> <container type="folder">36-38</container>
>> <container type=?item?>1</container>
>> <unittitle>John Smith Interview, <unitdate>1970</unitdate></unittitle>
>> <physdesc>(4 sound tape reels, 2 duplicate sound cassettes)</physdesc></did></c03>
>>  
>>  
>> I?m sure there are probably many other approaches to this problem as well, but it would be helpful if the community could also address the issue from the perspective of incorporating AV descriptions into larger EAD finding aids that include a mix of documents/paper and av. 
>>  
>> Best, 
>> Barbara D. Aikens 
>>  
>> Chief, Collections Processing
>> Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution
>> Ph: 202-633-7941
>> email:  [log in to unmask] 
>>  
>> Mailing Address
>> Archives of American Art, Smithsonian Institution
>> PO Box 37012
>> Victor Bldg., Suite 2200, MRC 937
>> Washington, DC  20013-7012 
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Encoded Archival Description List [ mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of BUTTARS Grant
>> Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2011 9:11 AM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: Distinction between analogue and digital archives in EAD
>>  
>> Hi Jane,
>>  
>> I was pondering this issue a while a go but never reached a firm conclusion.  My thoughts were more inclined towards <phystech> and perhaps nesting <phystech> elements as the situation requires it.
>>  
>> e.g.
>>  
>> <phystech encodinganalog="isadg(2)344"> 
>> <head>Physical Characteristics and Technical Requirements</head> 
>> <p>This series contains several types of material in non-human-readable formats:</p>
>>       <phystech type="digital-cd-audio"><p>Audio recordings on CD</p></phystech>
>>       <phystech type="digital-pdf"><p>Formatted text in pdf format</p></phystech>
>> </phystech>
>>  
>> Note that the values of @type here are simply drawn from my head rather than any standardised list (is there one?)
>>  
>> Regards
>>  
>> Grant
>>  
>>  
>> ---------------------------------
>> Grant E. L. Buttars,
>> Deputy University Archivist,
>> Special Collections,
>> Centre for Research Collections,
>> Edinburgh University Library,
>> Information Services,
>> University of Edinburgh,
>> George Square,
>> Edinburgh,
>> EH8 9LJ.
>> http://www.ed.ac.uk/is/crc/
>> tel: 0131 651 3852
>> =================================
>>  
>> Coming to consult something?  Please see http://www.ed.ac.uk/is/crc/ for service information 
>>  
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: Encoded Archival Description List 
>> > [ mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jane Stevenson
>> > Sent: 19 May 2011 10:53
>> > To: [log in to unmask]
>> > Subject: Distinction between analogue and digital archives in EAD
>> > 
>> > Hi all,
>> > 
>> > I wonder if anyone is using EAD to specify whether their 
>> > archives are analogue or digital, or mixed? We could use 
>> > <physfacet> for this, but it seems to be more about 
>> > appearance. <genreform> would normally be for something like 
>> > 'photographs' but it would not distinguish digital or 
>> > otherwise. Maybe <genreform type='digital'>? 
>> > 
>> > <phystech> refer to the need for hardware/software to access 
>> > archives, but I'm not sure it's the right thing to use for 
>> > the basic fact of being digital. 
>> > 
>> > Whilst we don't really have digital archives described on the 
>> > Hub at present, I think it will be useful to distinguish 
>> > between analogue and digital in the future. If we were going 
>> > to use EAD for this, I'd like to do it in the same way as 
>> > others are doing. 
>> > 
>> > many thanks,
>> > Jane.
>> > 
>> > Jane Stevenson
>> > The Archives Hub
>> > Mimas, The University of Manchester
>> > Devonshire House, Oxford Road
>> > Manchester M13 9QH
>> > 
>> > email:[log in to unmask]
>> > tel: 0161 275 6055
>> > website: archiveshub.ac.uk
>> > blog: archiveshub.ac.uk/blog
>> > twitter: twitter.com/archiveshub
>> > 
>> -- 
>> The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
>> Scotland, with registration number SC005336.

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
July 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 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
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
October 1998
September 1998
August 1998
July 1998
June 1998
May 1998
April 1998
March 1998
February 1998
January 1998
December 1997
November 1997
October 1997
September 1997
August 1997
July 1997
June 1997
May 1997
April 1997
March 1997
February 1997
January 1997
December 1996
November 1996
October 1996
September 1996
August 1996
July 1996
June 1996
May 1996
April 1996
March 1996
February 1996
December 1995

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager