On Mon, 10 Mar 1997, Processing Department wrote:
Thanks to Michael for his response. I have a couple of questions:
> A folder is a physical unit. A file is a structural component. Do you
> actually mean that you have a component that is a file? If so, one
> would select the value "file" for the "level" attribute for <c>.
This component is a folder in the sense that it is a fairly arbitrarily
determined physical component, in the same way that a box is a physical
component. Each folder has a heading and a date span, but folders are not
numbered within the box, hence no number to put in <unitloc>. In saying
that a file is a structural component, do you mean that it is a part of
the intellectual structure of the collection (e.g., record group --->
series ---> sub-series ---> file)? I think, in the example I currently
have at hand, that the folders are not necessarily reflective of original
order and, along with their headings and span dates, ought to be
considered solely as physical containers, so that using <c0x
level="file"> would not work.
I would say that the intellectual arrangement of the collection at hand
probably stops at the series level and that the components below that are
reflective of physical containment and not of intellectual organization.
> <unitloc> is for tagging physical locations such a box numbers or
> repository locations. That's why it's not available within <unittitle>,
> a structural element.
So can <unitloc> and <unittitle> coexist within a single <did> or are
they mutually exclusive? If <unitloc> is used to reflect a folder
(physical container), unnumbered, and that folder has a folder heading
and date span written on it, would it be correct to nest the
heading/date as follows?:
<unitloc type="container" containert="folder">
<title>Preferred Admissions/Pre-Medical Counseling,
My understanding of what Michael says above is that one would only use
<unittitle> in cases where the file (as opposed to the folder) and its
heading and span date could be considered to be a part of the
intellectual structure of the collection? In order for that to be the
case, I would assume that one would need to be fairly certain that there
had been some original order in the files and that that had been
maintained fairly strictly in the processing? Do such structural
components, like series, ever have a numberable unit? If not, would it
be safe to say that in using a <c0x level="file"> one would never then
use a <did><unitloc> combination? I know that many repositories number
their series, but is this more a matter of display convention than
anything else? Boxes and folders may have numbers to denote their
physical occurrence and to differentiate them from other similar physical
containment devices, but does this same apply to structural components?
Sorry to ask so many questions here, but I would really like to
understand this a little better. I find the components section of EAD
the most difficult to digest. I think that some of this is due to the
structural vs. physical comcept which, I suspect, is much more evident at
the series level and box locations than it is at the more granular level
of file/folder. If someone who has a clear idea about this would like to
weigh in or point me to relevant readings, I'd greatly appreciate it!
-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-Bill Landis | JSTOR Production Coordinator-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_
"All landscapes eventually turn to land,
the gold of the imagination to the lead of the reality."
V.S. Naipaul | The Mimic Men
[log in to unmask] | 313 936.2363-_-