I think being able to draw from external vocabularies would be a desirable approach rather than expanding the existing vocabulary.
I agree that it is unclear in MODS how one could express the relationship between different files being deposited in a repository as one digital object. We currently do not record any information about a dataset if it is being deposited with the research publication in our repository. The MODS simply describes the research publication. While we could probably add a <note> that mentions the dataset, I don't think that is granular enough for enabling discovery.
----- Original Message -----
> From: "John B Howard" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2014 12:37:27 AM
> Subject: Re: [MODS] MODS relatedItem to associate datasets with research publications
> Dear All,
> The relationships described by the brief vocabulary associated with the MODS
> 'relatedItem' is very limited and, as has been pointed out, does not provide
> the semantics
> needed to express the various kinds of relationships that potentially exist
> among objects.
> I would favour an approach that allows external vocabularies to be referenced
> and the 'type'
> attribute to draw its value from the specified vocabulary. An approach might
> be specified
> using xlink, or by introducing new attributes to the 'relatedItem' element.
> Regardless of
> approach, I'd argue that given the broad range of contexts in which MODS is
> being used,
> simply expanding the existing vocabulary is not an adequate approach.
Discovery Metadata Librarian
Stanford University Libraries
[log in to unmask]