 |
 |
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: <physdesc> <extent>1</extent> <genreform>videocassette<genreform> <physfacet>U-matic, sound, color</physfacet> <dimensions>3/4 inch</dimensions> </physdesc> 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>? <physdesc> <extent>1</extent> <genreform>videocassette<genreform> <extent>(60 minutes)</extent> <physfacet>U-matic, sound, color</physfacet> <dimensions>3/4-inch</dimensions> </physdesc> Or the duration could follow the number of cassettes: <physdesc> <extent>1 60-minute</extent> <genreform>videocassette<genreform> <physfacet>U-matic, sound, color</physfacet> <dimensions>3/4-inch</dimensions> </physdesc> 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." Best, Marsha 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 <did> ... <physdesc><extent>1</extent><genreform>videotape</genreform></physdesc> ... </did> <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