[tei-council] Fwd: biblStruct replaced by biblItem in P5?

[John A. Walsh]

Hi Syd,

I take your point about <biblItem> being an equivalent of  
<biblStruct> that better handles wrapping/nesting or related items.   
If I'm understanding MODS correctly, MODS handles this nesting by  
having one or more child <relatedItem> elements with the exact same  
content model as the root <mods> element.  <relatedItem> has a "type"  
attribute with a controlled vocabulary that helps define the relation  
("preceding," "succeeding," "original," "host," "constituent,"  
"series," "otherVersion," "otherFormat," "isReferencedBy").

I wonder if we could take this approach with <biblStruct>.  That is  
<biblStruct> could have child <relatedItem> elements, and the content  
model of <relatedItem> is the same as <biblStruct>.  This might  
provide an easier transition for the old timers.

John
--
| John A. Walsh
| Associate Director for Projects and Services, Digital Library Program
| Associate Librarian, University Libraries
| Adjunct Associate Professor, Department of English
| Indiana University, 1320 East Tenth Street, Bloomington, IN 47405
| Voice:812-855-8758 Fax:812-856-2062 <mailto:jawalsh at indiana.edu>



On Apr 26, 2006, at 11:02 AM, Syd Bauman wrote:

>> I know the biblStruct/biblItem has been floating around for a while,
>> and I can't recall the status,
>
> Last left, Council had asked me to prepare the bibliography for P5
> using <bibl> for some, and <biblItem> for some, and to report back on
> how big a difference it was, which was easier, etc. This project was
> assigned to me almost a year ago, but was almost immediately put on a
> back burner because Council had other things (SO, classes, etc.) you
> wanted me to work on first.
>
>
>> My position is that biblStruct is adequate for TEI and if folks
>> want to build fuller bibliographic data sets in XML there are other
>> standards, e.g., MODS, that are well-suited to that task.
>
> I think I disagree because I think of <biblItem> not as a fuller
> bibliographic data set than <biblStruct>, but rather as an equivalent
> that
>
> a) more naturally represents the "wrapping" of one piece of a
>    reference (e.g., an article) by another (e.g., the journal an
>    article appears in) than <biblStruct>, and
>
> b) makes data capture and processing of bi biographic information much
>    easier than <bibl>.
>
> That said, I still think <biblItem> is slightly under-specified, and
> that the examples the XML-biblio group came up with need work.
>
> _______________________________________________
> tei-council mailing list
> tei-council at lists.village.Virginia.EDU
> http://lists.village.Virginia.EDU/mailman/listinfo/tei-council