[tei-council] Fwd: biblStruct replaced by biblItem in P5?
John A. Walsh
jawalsh at indiana.edu
Wed Apr 26 21:25:45 EDT 2006
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 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
> 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
More information about the tei-council