Hi, all,

Admittedly, I'm cribbing here to some extent from AMIM (American Moving Image Materials) rules for physical description of video recordings, although AMIM would put more info in the <extent> element,  but how about something like:

<extent>1</extent> <genreform>videocassette<genreform>
<physfacet>U-matic, sound, color</physfacet>  <dimensions>3/4 inch</dimensions>

Leave out "color" if the tape is black-and-white, of course! Just suggesting that sound and color characteristics are useful.

Duration is a problem in EAD. It's another way of stating extent in a way. Could <extent> be repeated after <genreform>?

<extent>1</extent> <genreform>videocassette<genreform> <extent>(60 minutes)</extent>
<physfacet>U-matic, sound, color</physfacet>

Or the duration could follow the number of cassettes:

<extent>1 60-minute</extent> <genreform>videocassette<genreform>
<physfacet>U-matic, sound, color</physfacet>

The tape width is important playback info, so I'd suggest including the dimensions element. The brand name of the tape, Scotch, might be more appropriate in a note, although you could precede "U-matic" with "Scotch." 



Marsha Maguire
Recorded Sound Cataloger
Motion Picture, Broadcasting, and Recorded Sound Division
Library of Congress, Packard Campus
Culpeper, VA 22701-7551
email: [log in to unmask]

Opinions are my own.

-----Original Message-----
From: Encoded Archival Description List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Giovanni Michetti
Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2010 1:58 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: phys-what?

Hi Michele,

here my comments:

1. <physdesc><extent>1 Scotch Umatic UCA 60 tape</extent></physdesc>

It's not a proper solution, since <extent> should be used for quantity only.

2. <physdesc><genreform>Scotch Umatic UCA 60</genreform></physdesc>

I don't like it. I wouldn't consider "Scotch Umatic" a type of material
-- I'd rather say it's a "videotape" from the <genreform> point of view. 
In fact, looking at the examples in the Tag Library you'll find 'videotape', 'sound recording', 'drawing' etc.
OK, I guess we may consider it as a sort of synecdoche, as we use 'mp3' 
to generically mean a (compressed) 'sound recording', but it seems we need to 'stretch' things too much.
Anyway, you may refine it adding <extent>:
<physdesc><extent>1</extent><genreform>Scotch Umatic UCA 60</genreform></physdesc>

3. <phystech><p>Scotch Umatic UCA 60</p></phystech>

It seems a good option.
Actually <phystech> "includes details of [their] physical composition or the need for particular hardware or software to preserve or access the materials" (Tag Library): so I'd note "Scotch Umatic" implies the need for a particular device but it's not per se information about that device. Anyway, I still think <phystech> is a good option.

4. <physdesc><physfacet type="format">Scotch Umatic UCA 60 videotape</physfacet></physdesc>

I don't like it: <physfacet> is about the "aspect of the appearance of the described materials". Of course "Umatic UCA 60" can be handled as 'appearance' but it doesn't seem the best option.

5. What about

<phystech><p>Scotch Umatic UCA 60</p></phystech>


Too redundant?

Giovanni Michetti
University of Rome "La Sapienza"

Il 07/12/2010 17.43, Michele R Combs ha scritto:
> What's the appropriate element combination to describe the specific type of audio or videorecording, e.g. Scotch Umatic UCA 60?
> <physdesc><extent>1 Scotch Umatic UCA 60 tape</extent></physdesc> 
> <physdesc><genreform>Scotch Umatic UCA 60</genreform></physdesc> 
> <phystech><p>Scotch Umatic UCA 60</p></phystech> <physdesc><physfacet 
> type="format">Scotch Umatic UCA 60 videotape</physfacet></physdesc> 
> These all seem about equally right to me.  Thoughts?
> Michele