From: Jody DeRidder
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
Of Deridder, Jody L
Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007
To: 'Encoded Archival Description
Subject: RE: EAD and MODS
From: Encoded Archival
Description List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of Farris Wahbeh
Sent: Saturday, February 24, 2007
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: EAD and MODS crosswalks?
As I am
processing a collection of audio recordings, I can't help but wonder if there
is a crosswalk
between MODS and EAD? As MODS is
based on MARC21, I'm assuming the crosswalk is already
and inherently built in to the EAD document
if one was using MARC21 @ relatedencoding in
in this case I feel MODS elements would describe items in a clearer fashion
finding aid. For instance, in
<dsc>at <c03 level=item) MODS elements would fit audio recording
items more clearly.
upper elements in EAD serve a very significant purpose, perhaps MODS can serve
lower elements a bit better. Is
this possible without using METS as the overall infrastructure and
instead using EAD?
a wrapper in EAD where I can describe certain features in a MODS format? Is
crosswalk between MODS and EAD?
these questions may be futile given relatedencoding=MARC21 may perhaps solve
problem, but I can't help but ask
anyway just out of sheer curiosity. Has anyone else thought of
combining the two for describing
sub-components in EAD?
proposition seem futile or ridiculous to well-versed EAD users and/or MODS
for any advice and thoughts.
Creative Audio Archive