[tei-council] SH-OtherMetadataStandards.xml: the missing chapter

[Lou Burnard]

Ah, found it.

http://www.tei-c.org/Activities/Council/Meetings/tcm30.xml (Minutes of 
council meeting in Berlin, April 2007  at which all P5 chapters were 
reviewed)


"SH-OtherMetadataStandards.xml

MD recommends chapter be dropped. JW (co-author of the re-write) 
concurs. JW was assigned to draft a few paragraphs discussing the 
relationship between the TEI Header and other standards (including MARC 
and Dublin Core) in general terms, without detailed mappings.

Action 52: JW TRAC http://tei.oucs.ox.ac.uk/trac/TEIP5/ticket/336 . 
Draft paras on metadata standards 2007-05-05
Action 53: SB put JW paras in appropriate place at end of HD 2007-05-12"



On 02/02/13 23:06, Lou Burnard wrote:
> Well, here's my understanding of the history:
>
> Chapter SH was originally called "The Independent Header" and was
> drafted for P3 by Rich Giordano. This survived into P4, but in P5 was
> removed. In 2005 or so, when Natasha and John were both on Council, they
> volunteered to rework it as a survey of the way libraries in practice
> mapped TEI Header elements to other metadata standards. There are a few
> mentions of this work as being ongoing in the minutes of that year --
> not having all the minutes to hand I am not sure what happened to this
> work -- but doubt John can.
>
>
>
> On 02/02/13 22:08, Kevin Hawkins wrote:
>> Folks,
>>
>> I just came across Source/Guidelines/en/SH-OtherMetadataStandards.xml .
>>     From comments in the file, it looks like John Walsh, Natasha Smith,
>> and others from the SIG on Libraries were once involved in drafting this
>> but it never made it into the Guidelines.
>>
>> Does anyone know whether this was rejected for inclusion in the
>> Guidelines, or was the work just never completed?  It includes a number
>> of things that made their way in some form into the latest revision of
>> the Best Practices for TEI in Libraries (though I have quibbles with how
>> many things are stated in "SH"), and I was thinking that since we
>> decided to incorporate things from the Best Practices into the
>> Guidelines, it seems like a good way to start would be to get SH into a
>> good enough form for inclusion in the Guidelines.  I'm willing to take
>> the lead on that and ask for feedback on my revised draft from the SIG
>> on Libraries.
>>
>> Objections?  Does anyone have notes on previous objections to the text,
>> things that were meant to be incorporated, etc.?
>>
>> --Kevin
>>
>