Print

Print


In building our own consortial best practice guide, we decided to use the same guidance for <origination> at the c0X level as found in the OAC BPG.  However, as part of our DACS implementation guidelines, we adapted DACS 9.10 to disallow the use of <origination> at the file or item level, relying on the title name segment to hold creator information. Use of <origination> is allowed at the series, subseries, etc. levels.

We planning to start enforcing DACS-compliance in January, though, so there aren't examples in our existing EAD records.

Cory Nimer
Manuscripts Cataloger/Metadata Specialist
Brigham Young University
1108 HBLL
(801) 422-6091

-----Original Message-----
From: Encoded Archival Description List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of John Bewley
Sent: Friday, December 14, 2007 10:38 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: origination use in container lists

Does anybody have reservations about applying <origination> at the
folder/file/item level in container lists? That is, is anyone reserving its
use for higher level collection co-creators at perhaps the series or
subseries level within container lists? When I search the archives I find
examples of use at the lower level but without questioning if this is
appropriate use of the origination element.

The OAC Best Practice Guidelines (as just one example) , seems ambiguous to
me - does it suggest that creators such as photographers should be stated
using <origination> at the item level?

Mandatory if the creator(s) or collector(s) at the level being described is
different than defined at the <archdesc> or in a parent level. Use one or
more <origination> tags as necessary.
(OAC Guidelines -
<http://www.cdlib.org/inside/diglib/guidelines/bpgead/bpgead_4c.html#d0e2020>)


Thanks for any thoughts.

John Bewley
Music Library
University at Buffalo, The State University of New York
716 645-2924