dates

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
5 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

dates

Bruce D'Arcus
I'm at a bit of a crossroads on a design decision regarding date
handling:

I've just recorded (darcs language for committed) some changes to date
handling, which exposed the following problem/issue:

The structure of MODS and of CSL assumes that the publication date for
a journal article is basically a property of the journal, rather than
the article.  In fact, I'd need to jump through some technical hoops to
change this, with unclear implications.

So, three options:

1)  stay with existing practice, in which case article dates won't get
formatted correctly unless the MODS  records encode the data in the
relatedItem host.

2)  add logic to pull the date from the main level, but otherwise keep
everything (e.g. CSL) the same

3)  reconsider the logic (e.g. the structure of CSL)

3 is tricky, because even among metadata experts, the issue of which
level the date belongs to is ambiguous.  It also may negatively impact
more complex data-handling, such as for original publication and such
(I don't know; I have yet thought about how to handle that).

2 is a little hackish, and leaves MODS coding for this stuff ambiguous.

Thoughts?

Bruce



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: dates

James Howison
Is this a Journal specific issue, or does it apply to all containers
(ie the date is the date of the container, rather than the item?)

On May 14, 2005, at 10:49 AM, Bruce D'Arcus wrote:

> I'm at a bit of a crossroads on a design decision regarding date
> handling:
>
> I've just recorded (darcs language for committed) some changes to date
> handling, which exposed the following problem/issue:
>
> The structure of MODS and of CSL assumes that the publication date for
> a journal article is basically a property of the journal, rather than
> the article.  In fact, I'd need to jump through some technical hoops
> to change this, with unclear implications.
>
> So, three options:
>
> 1)  stay with existing practice, in which case article dates won't get
> formatted correctly unless the MODS  records encode the data in the
> relatedItem host.
>
> 2)  add logic to pull the date from the main level, but otherwise keep
> everything (e.g. CSL) the same
>
> 3)  reconsider the logic (e.g. the structure of CSL)
>
> 3 is tricky, because even among metadata experts, the issue of which
> level the date belongs to is ambiguous.  It also may negatively impact
> more complex data-handling, such as for original publication and such
> (I don't know; I have yet thought about how to handle that).
>
> 2 is a little hackish, and leaves MODS coding for this stuff ambiguous.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Bruce
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by Oracle Space Sweepstakes
> Want to be the first software developer in space?
> Enter now for the Oracle Space Sweepstakes!
> http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7393&alloc_id=16281&op=click
> _______________________________________________
> xbiblio-devel mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xbiblio-devel
>
>
--James
+1 315 395 4056
Details: <http://freelancepropaganda.com/jameshowison.vcf>



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: dates

Bruce D'Arcus
On May 14, 2005, at 6:06 PM, James Howison wrote:

> Is this a Journal specific issue, or does it apply to all containers
> (ie the date is the date of the container, rather than the item?)

I guess all.  It just becomes more apparent, somehow, when dealing with
serials (it seems obvious to code a dateIssued with the book rather
than the chapter).

Bruce



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: dates

James Howison
On May 14, 2005, at 6:20 PM, Bruce D'Arcus wrote:

>
> On May 14, 2005, at 6:06 PM, James Howison wrote:
>
>> Is this a Journal specific issue, or does it apply to all containers
>> (ie the date is the date of the container, rather than the item?)
>
> I guess all.  It just becomes more apparent, somehow, when dealing
> with serials (it seems obvious to code a dateIssued with the book
> rather than the chapter).

So it get's hairy when we're talking about something like a web
publication where the container doesn't really have a publication date,
but the articles do.
Physical production meant that the article neccessarily had the same
date as the container, that assumption has changed.

What about reprinted articles in containers later (ie collected volumes
of classic papers).  those would need two dates, wouldn't they (frankly
I think I'd probably just cite the earlier publication and let the user
figure out that it was more accessible in a reprint, gosh, that's
mean!)

--J



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: dates

Bruce D'Arcus
On May 14, 2005, at 6:23 PM, James Howison wrote:

> So it get's hairy when we're talking about something like a web
> publication where the container doesn't really have a publication
> date, but the articles do.
> Physical production meant that the article neccessarily had the same
> date as the container, that assumption has changed.

That's a good point.  Maybe I ought to add an example or two like that;
say a weblog post.

I guess we'd end up with something like this (not including url, which
I'm too lazy to code!):

    <mods ID="darcusb2005">
       <titleInfo>
          <title>Innovation and Problems of Metadata Modeling</title>
       </titleInfo>
       <name type="personal">
          <namePart type="given">Bruce</namePart>
          <namePart type="family">D'Arcus</namePart>
          <role>
             <roleTerm authority="marcrelator"
type="text">author</roleTerm>
          </role>
       </name>
       <typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource>
       <relatedItem type="host">
          <titleInfo>
             <title>darcusblog</title>
          </titleInfo>
          <originInfo>
             <issuance>continuing</issuance>
          </originInfo>
          <genre>weblog</genre>
          <part>
             <date>2005-05-01</date>
          </part>
       </relatedItem>
    </mods>

... or:

    <mods ID="darcusb2005">
       <titleInfo>
          <title>Innovation and Problems of Metadata Modeling</title>
       </titleInfo>
       <name type="personal">
          <namePart type="given">Bruce</namePart>
          <namePart type="family">D'Arcus</namePart>
          <role>
             <roleTerm authority="marcrelator"
type="text">author</roleTerm>
          </role>
       </name>
          <originInfo>
             <dateIssued>2005-05-01</dateIssued>
          </originInfo>
       <typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource>
       <relatedItem type="host">
          <titleInfo>
             <title>darcusblog</title>
          </titleInfo>
          <originInfo>
             <issuance>continuing</issuance>
          </originInfo>
          <genre>weblog</genre>
       </relatedItem>
    </mods>

Am not sure which I prefer.

Bruce