Print

Print


Ray Denenberg wrote:
>
> Sorry, was away yesterday and am now catching up with yesterday's discussion...
> MacKenzie wrote:
>
> > One of Ray's earlier comments was that an attribute (such as the OBJID on
> > the root METS element) wouldn't do as the place to put the unique
> > identifier for the METS object. Do you still thank so? Because I agree
> > that it's the logical choice, and that a METS/OAI archive should be able
> > to deal with attributes as easily as it does elements.
>
> OBJID is described as an identifier for the "original source document".  Maybe I
> don't understand what METS means by "original source document".  But if it means
> either (1) the object that the METS package pertains to, or (2) something
> analogous to DC "source", then clearly this is not appropriate as an identifier
> for the METS package.  No?
>

Ray, if that is indeed the meaning of OBJID, I fully agree that it is
not appropriate.  What we are looking for is an identifier of the METS
package itself.

herbert