Hi all,

Many thanks for the replies. We'll look at this, and let the list know what we decide to do. 
Certainly using the URI seems like the best option from the point of view of sustainability.

At present we only have one contributor asking us about this, but its something that I feel is worth 
encouraging, and therefore supporting.


Daniel Pitti wrote:
> I prefer the method described below by Mark, as the Ordnance Survey 
> should have all of the data you need, authoritatively maintained. 
> Assuming the URI is persistent and that you reference Bristol more than 
> once in one or more finding aids, it will be more efficient with respect 
> to maintenance.
> On May 6, 2010, at 3:16 PM, Mark A. Matienzo wrote:
>> On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 12:18 PM, Jane Stevenson
>> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>> I'll look at using authfilenumber. Maybe something like:
>>> <geogname rules="ncarules" authfilenumber="ST590730">Bristol</geogname>
>>> But specifying a source here would mean it applies to the place name, 
>>> not
>>> the grid reference.  I'm not sure how to provide the source/rules for 
>>> both,
>>> as they are different.
>> Right, that's a good point. You could also use a method using the URI
>> method, perhaps something like:
>> <geogname rules="ncarules">
>>  Bristol
>>  <extptr linktype="locator" actuate="actuatenone" show="shownone"
>>    href=""/>
>> </geogname>
>> ** Note that this example URI isn't valid, as the Ordnance Survey
>> hasn't yet provided a URI structure for 100 m grid references. 1 km
>> grid references are valid, however.
>> Mark A. Matienzo
>> Digital Archivist, Manuscripts and Archives
>> Yale University Library