Hi Jessica --
For our digitized material we distinguish between the object and the associated
images. In your diary example, we would consider the object to be the diary,
and it would have ten associated images. Or another example: if we have four
digital images (front, back, top, bottom) of a piece of sculpture, the object is
the sculpture and it has four associated images.
If you want to title each image, in addition to titling the object, then I would
title the images with whatever makes sense -- "Page 1" or "Top view" or whatever.
As for how this would be encoded in EAD, you could use a <daogrp> with as many
<dao>s as you need for the associated images. For example:
<origination>Anna Hyatt Huntington</origination>
<dimensions>5" high by 15-1/2" long by 4-1/2" wide</dimensions>
<daogrp title="Yawning Tiger">
<daoloc title="Top view" href="top.png"/>
<daoloc title="Left view" href="left.png"/>
<daoloc title="Right view" href="right.png"/>
<daogrp> can also contain a <daodesc> if you want more descriptive info within
the dao structure, not just in the c0
On 2/27/2013 7:39 PM, Jessica Bushey wrote:
> I have an archival description and EAD question - I'm hoping for some examples
> and/or a reference to a standard that addresses this issue:
> If you have a Diary with an item-level archival description and 10 digital
> images of the Diary that are linked in the database. How are you naming the
> digital images? I have heard the use of "part" for the digital objects. In METS
> the term "page" could be used. But what about situations when the digital
> objects are really just views (e.g., front, back and 3/4)?
> If anyone has advice on what to call the multiple digital objects that results
> from digitization of archival materials, I am eager to hear it. But more so, I
> would like to know how this is dealt with in EAD, as one would want to export
> the Item level description and all its "parts".