Hi John,

I've been wanting to weigh in on your XML questions all week and now
finally have the time. I'm not an XML expert, but a practitioner who
uses XML and XQuery for my daily metadata work.


On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 2:45 PM, Myers, John F. <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> In XML, this seems possible via the use of attributes within the tags.  A
> tag pair could frame a transcribed piece of data, while an associated
> attribute could encode the corresponding controlled form.  An alternative
> would be the opposite arrangement (controlled form between tags with
> transcribed form in the attribute) but I think that would work less well
> (experts feel free to chime in).
>

What you describe here with the use of attributes would be how this is
normally done in XML. Attributes represent properties of the element
and are generally shorter pieces of data. So, I think the controlled
form/URI would be best suited for an attribute rather than the
transcribed string value.

>
> Does the use of XML tag attributes seem to be a useful solution?
>

Yes, this use of XML attributes is a current solution to
transcribed/controlled data differences. It's one that we use
frequently for our digital collections work.

> Is development of XML tag attributes and associated control/validation
> structures feasible?
>

Yes, if there is a commitment to continue to develop XML schemas for
library metadata.

> Are there solutions outside of XML that similarly balance description and
> access/identification and selection?
>
I don't have a answer to this one, but I do have a related question:
We currently have several library metadata schemas using XML and seem
to be heavily invested in this standard. Are we going to continue in
this direction? I'll admit I have a dog in this fight, since we use an
XML native database, MarkLogic Server.  :)

Chris

Christine Schwartz
Metadata Librarian
Princeton Theological Seminary Library