Print

Print


The way I see it, the important organizational information is contained in
the @level attribute, so I avoid using numbered components at all.  Just
using <c> and a @level avoids situations like this, I think.

Ethan Gruber

On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 11:58 PM, Mark Carlson <[log in to unmask]>wrote:

> This has been my experience as well.  I call it "Encoding For Display" or
> EFD for short (EAD's wicked cousin).  I've seen all kinds of weird things
> pass my eyelids just because someone wanted a particular display that the
> stylesheet hadn't (yet) been programmed to accommodate.  Little did they
> know that I was their yellow brick road to Oz and all they had to do was to
> click their heals together three times and say "There's no EFD, There's no
> EFD".
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, 14 Apr 2010, Joyce Chapman wrote:
>
>  This could be different from what is under discussion here, but I've
>> seen "false levels" at multiple institutions while cleaning up batches
>> of EADs. As far as I can tell, the main reason component padding has
>> been done historically is for display purposes. Some processors in the
>> past may not have understoond CSS or didn't have access to the finding
>> aid CSS files. While processors may not know what CSS is, they can
>> clearly see that they control indentation through component levels.
>> Add a component level and you immediately see increased indentation in
>> your rendered display. I think it's easy for processors not to
>> understanding why this is a bad practice if they are new to
>> technologies like EAD/CSS/HTML or if no one stressed the separation of
>> encoding and display in their training.
>>
>> Joyce
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 6:29 PM, Fox, Michael <[log in to unmask]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I just have to comment on an aspect of EAD that may or may not be implied
>>> in the original post, one that has nothing to do with the technical
>>> solutions suggested.
>>>
>>> To be very clear, the statement that
>>>
>>> My understanding correct EAD encoding:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>         * c1 - Series
>>>>         * c2 - Subseries
>>>>         * c3 - File
>>>>
>>>>     OR
>>>>
>>>>         * c1 - Series
>>>>         * c2 - File
>>>>
>>>
>>> is not literally correct.   There is no assumption in EAD that any level
>>> of component relates to any level of intellectual arrangement.  A <c01>
>>> might be a sub-collection, series, subseries, file or item.  The same
>>> principle applies to every component level.  The LEVEL attribute is
>>> available to make such designations if one wishes.
>>>
>>> I'm not sure I understand what a "false level" might be.   Sometimes I
>>> have seen individuals attempt to encode containers as component levels- a
>>> real no no.   But of course we do create levels of hierarchy within our
>>> arrangements that organize more than describe subordinate units of "real
>>> stuff."  As I understand, German archives actually have a term that
>>> describes such levels that is rendered by the value "class" for the
>>> attribute LEVEL.  It is short for classification or in German "Tektonik".
>>>  It is not classification in the sense of Dewey but rather refers to the
>>> structural elements of a hierarchy.
>>>
>>> Michael Fox
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Encoded Archival Description List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
>>> Of Mark Carlson
>>> Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2010 1:10 PM
>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>> Subject: Re: Promoting Container Levels
>>>
>>> That's true.  One needs to remember that component levels are nested and
>>> that valid EAD documents require <did> within component levels, so you
>>> can't just remove the false component level and expect it to work.
>>> Assuming that you are using the EAD DTD, this script appears to work
>>> (although I haven't tested it extensively).  Contact me offlist if you
>>> want to pursue trying it.  Mark
>>>
>>> <?xml version="1.0"?>
>>> <xsl:stylesheet version="1.0"
>>> xmlns:xsl="http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform"
>>> xmlns:msxsl="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:xslt">
>>> <xsl:output method="xml" doctype-public="+//ISBN 1-931666-00-8//DTD
>>> ead.dtd (Encoded Archival Description (EAD) Version 2002)//EN"
>>> doctype-system="ead.dtd" indent="yes"/>
>>> <xsl:template match="* | processing-instruction() | comment()">
>>> <xsl:copy>
>>> <xsl:copy-of select="@*"/>
>>> <xsl:apply-templates/>
>>> </xsl:copy>
>>> </xsl:template>
>>>
>>> <!-- Change this to match the <did> of the false level -->
>>> <xsl:template match="c03/did"/>
>>> <!-- Change this to match the component level of the false level -->
>>> <xsl:template match="c03">
>>> <!-- The following should match the component level of the line above -->
>>> <c03>
>>> <!-- This should match the next component level down from the one being
>>> matched above -->
>>> <xsl:copy-of select="descendant::c04/*"/>
>>> </c03>
>>> </xsl:template>
>>> </xsl:stylesheet>
>>>
>>> On 4/14/2010 7:37 AM, Nathan Tallman wrote:
>>>
>>>> As far as I know, there isn't an easy way to do this.  But it never
>>>> hurts to ask, right?
>>>>
>>>> Past encoding practices at my institution inserted a false c0 layer in
>>>> EAD finding aids.  For example,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>     My understanding correct EAD encoding:
>>>>
>>>>         * c1 - Series
>>>>         * c2 - Subseries
>>>>         * c3 - File
>>>>
>>>>     OR
>>>>
>>>>         * c1 - Series
>>>>         * c2 - File
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>     Past practices at my institution:
>>>>
>>>>         * c1 - Series
>>>>         * c2 - Subseries
>>>>         * c3 - False layer to enclose files
>>>>         * c4 - File
>>>>
>>>>     OR
>>>>
>>>>         * c1 - Series
>>>>         * c2 - False layer
>>>>         * c3 - File
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Other than hand-coding, is there a way to promote the c4s to c3s and
>>>> eliminate the false level?  I haven't used Archivist Toolkit or many
>>>> other collection management software packages that might have this
>>>> functionality.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks!
>>>>
>>>> Nathan Tallman
>>>> Associate Archivist
>>>> American Jewish Archives
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Joyce Chapman
>> NCSU Libraries
>> Metadata and Cataloging/
>> Digital Library Initiatives
>> [log in to unmask]
>>
>