Print

Print


HI Michele,

Ah, that's interesting. I was wondering about just using <note>. Maybe that is the best option. It really is just a helpful pointer to researchers to indicate that there is related material elsewhere in the same collection. 

cheers,
Jane.



On 16 Dec 2013, at 12:24, Michele R Combs <[log in to unmask]>
 wrote:

> Within the same collection, we just use a note with the text "See..." or "See also..."  For example:
> 
> <note><p>See also <ref target="smith_h">Smith, Helen</ref> (sister).</p></ref>
> 
> Michele
> ________________________________________
> From: Encoded Archival Description List [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of Jane Stevenson [[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Monday, December 16, 2013 4:47 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Question about <relatedmaterial>
> 
> Hi there,
> 
> I'm just wanting to advise an archivist who wants to refer to related material that is within the same collection.
> 
> The <relatedmaterial> tag is NOT for materials related by provenance.
> However, it is comparable to ISAD(G) 3.5.3
> ISAD(G) 3.5.3 is for "information about units of description in the same repository or elsewhere that ARE related by provenance or other association(s)
> 
> Has anyone come up against this issue before?
> 
> I know <separatedmaterial> is for materials related by provenance, but it's for materials that have been separated from the described materials. In this case there is no separation - it's all one collection, but the cataloguer wants to point researchers to related items within the collection.
> 
> cheers,
> Jane
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jane Stevenson
> The Archives Hub
> Mimas, The University of Manchester
> Devonshire House, Oxford Road
> Manchester M13 9QH
> 
> email:[log in to unmask]
> tel: 0161 275 6055
> website: archiveshub.ac.uk
> blog: archiveshub.ac.uk/blog
> twitter: twitter.com/archiveshub