Quantcast

multiple msIdentifiers

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
8 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

multiple msIdentifiers

Gabriel BODARD
Dear all,

Do you have a method for encoding more than one msIdentifier (such as
accession number or inventory number) for a single manuscript? As far as
I can see neither tei:msIdentifier nor tei:idno are repeatable in that
(required) position at the top of tei:msDesc.

We have instances of texts, for example, that are made up of two
fragments accessioned separately, or only joined after being catalogued
in their museum or library, and so both accession numbers continue to be
associated with the single text object.

All suggestions gratefully received.

Gabby


--
Dr Gabriel BODARD
(Research Associate in Digital Epigraphy)

Centre for Computing in the Humanities
King's College London
26-29 Drury Lane
London WC2B 5RL
Email: [hidden email]
Tel: +44 (0)20 7848 1388
Fax: +44 (0)20 7848 2980

http://www.digitalclassicist.org/
http://www.currentepigraphy.org/
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: multiple msIdentifiers

Pierazzo, Elena
Hi Gabby,

This should be the role of <altIdentifier>: "(alternative identifier) contains an alternative or former structured identifier used for a manuscript, such as a former catalogue number".
<altIdentifier> is repeatable.

Best
Elena

On 3 Feb 2011, at 17:22, Gabriel Bodard wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> Do you have a method for encoding more than one msIdentifier (such as
> accession number or inventory number) for a single manuscript? As far as
> I can see neither tei:msIdentifier nor tei:idno are repeatable in that
> (required) position at the top of tei:msDesc.
>
> We have instances of texts, for example, that are made up of two
> fragments accessioned separately, or only joined after being catalogued
> in their museum or library, and so both accession numbers continue to be
> associated with the single text object.
>
> All suggestions gratefully received.
>
> Gabby
>
>
> --
> Dr Gabriel BODARD
> (Research Associate in Digital Epigraphy)
>
> Centre for Computing in the Humanities
> King's College London
> 26-29 Drury Lane
> London WC2B 5RL
> Email: [hidden email]
> Tel: +44 (0)20 7848 1388
> Fax: +44 (0)20 7848 2980
>
> http://www.digitalclassicist.org/
> http://www.currentepigraphy.org/

--
Dr Elena Pierazzo
Lecturer in Digital Humanities
Centre for Computing in the Humanities
King's College London
26-29 Drury Lane
London WC2B 5RL

Phone: 0207-848-1949
Fax: 0207-848-2980
[hidden email]
www.kcl.ac.uk
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: multiple msIdentifiers

Dot Porter-2
In reply to this post by Gabriel BODARD
Gabby, I believe this is what altIdentifier is for.

http://www.tei-c.org/release/doc/tei-p5-doc/en/html/ref-altIdentifier.html

This does mean that you have to pick on identifier as the primary one.

Dot

On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 12:22 PM, Gabriel Bodard <[hidden email]> wrote:
Dear all,

Do you have a method for encoding more than one msIdentifier (such as accession number or inventory number) for a single manuscript? As far as I can see neither tei:msIdentifier nor tei:idno are repeatable in that (required) position at the top of tei:msDesc.

We have instances of texts, for example, that are made up of two fragments accessioned separately, or only joined after being catalogued in their museum or library, and so both accession numbers continue to be associated with the single text object.

All suggestions gratefully received.

Gabby


--
Dr Gabriel BODARD
(Research Associate in Digital Epigraphy)

Centre for Computing in the Humanities
King's College London
26-29 Drury Lane
London WC2B 5RL
Email: [hidden email]
Tel: +44 (0)20 7848 1388
Fax: +44 (0)20 7848 2980

http://www.digitalclassicist.org/
http://www.currentepigraphy.org/



--
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Dot Porter (MA, MSLS)       
Digital Medievalist, Digital Librarian
Email: [hidden email]
*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: multiple msIdentifiers

James Cummings
On 03/02/11 17:34, Dot Porter wrote:
> Gabby, I believe this is what altIdentifier is for.
>
> http://www.tei-c.org/release/doc/tei-p5-doc/en/html/ref-altIdentifier.html
>
> This does mean that you have to pick on identifier as the primary
> one.

I'm not sure this is true.  You are no longer required to have an
<idno> so you could just have a series of <altIdentifier> or
indeed <msName> elements.  It might be considered *good practice*
to designate its currently used identifier as <idno> but it isn't
a requirement in the current TEI I don't think.

-James

--
Dr James Cummings, Research Technologies Service
OUCS, University of Oxford
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: multiple msIdentifiers

Matthew James Driscoll
This was the whole point, in fact: you could have multiple <altIdentifier> elements where there was no primary identifier, as in the case of "scattered" or dispersed MSS, parts of which are found in different repositories.

Matthew

 
________________________________________
From: TEI (Text Encoding Initiative) public discussion list [[hidden email]] On Behalf Of James Cummings [[hidden email]]
Sent: 03 February 2011 18:46
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: multiple msIdentifiers

On 03/02/11 17:34, Dot Porter wrote:
> Gabby, I believe this is what altIdentifier is for.
>
> http://www.tei-c.org/release/doc/tei-p5-doc/en/html/ref-altIdentifier.html
>
> This does mean that you have to pick on identifier as the primary
> one.

I'm not sure this is true.  You are no longer required to have an
<idno> so you could just have a series of <altIdentifier> or
indeed <msName> elements.  It might be considered *good practice*
to designate its currently used identifier as <idno> but it isn't
a requirement in the current TEI I don't think.

-James

--
Dr James Cummings, Research Technologies Service
OUCS, University of Oxford
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: multiple msIdentifiers

Torsten Schassan-2
Hi,

> On 03/02/11 17:34, Dot Porter wrote:
>>
>> This does mean that you have to pick on identifier as the primary
>> one.


Am 03.02.2011 20:37, schrieb Matthew James Driscoll:
> This was the whole point, in fact: you could have multiple <altIdentifier> elements where there was no primary identifier, as in the case of "scattered" or dispersed MSS, parts of which are found in different repositories.


Isn't it that we have to really distinguish some cases here?

- If the fragments are now held together under a new shelfmark and the
other numbers are only referrers, it would have to be msIdentifier/idno
plus a series of altIdentifiers (cf. some remarks on this at the
bottom.) If I understood Gabby right this is his case.

- If the fragments were still separated but considered to have belonged
to one manuscript and shall (virtually) be described as one, it would be
the case Matthew drew upon. In this case one would use only altIdentifiers.

But:

- If the fragments were still sparated and if it is still valid what we
discussed some time ago, that with TEI only *existing* things could be
described (and therefore one could not describe something that is not
there but only known to have been there), we would have to go for Dot's
version: focus on one (existing) manuscript, which can be identified by
msIdentifier and relate this ms (closely) to others. altIdentifier
"feels" not completely right here but could be an option anyway?

To follow up on that (and what I mentioned already above): In the course
of the Europeana Regia project we worked a bit on the ENRICH ODD and we
want to propose the following list of values for altIdentifier/@type. Do
they sound reasonable, is something missing or unclear?

access = accession number
alternative = alternative writing
catalog = number in a catalogue
collection = a manuscript that has been grouped together with other
manuscripts for some reason
faulty = faulty shelfmark, but used in some literature
former = former shelfmark
internal = internal project identifier
multivolume = mss is part of a multivolume and therefore has more than
one shelfmark
other = unspecified
palimpsest = identifier of a previously written but deleted item
partial = identifier of a previously distinct item
system = former system identifier (Manuscriptorium specific)



Best, Torsten

--
Torsten Schassan
Digitale Editionen
Abteilung Handschriften, Inkunabeln, Sondersammlungen
Herzog August Bibliothek, Postfach 1364, D-38299 Wolfenbuettel
Tel.: +49-5331-808-130, schassan {at} hab.de

  http://www.hab.de
  http://www.hab.de/forschung/projekte/europeana-regia.htm
  http://www.hab.de/forschung/projekte/weiss64.htm
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: multiple msIdentifiers

Gabriel BODARD
Many thanks to all who replied on and off-list with this. I think
Torsten's right that there are different ways to handle this, and that
depends a bit on the status of the identifiers / accession numbers
you're recording. (In my case, the multiple fragments have now been
brought together and may even be recorded together in a database, but
the original accession numbers are still used to record the individual
fragments [234a and 256b, say], while the text is recorded as "belonging
to" accession 234a+256b. I suppose one could call that the new idno, but
it wouldn't be quite right [and would cause lookup problems].)

But clearly the tei:msIdentifier structure (to which I should have paid
more attention in the first place) is capable of handling all these
possibilities.

Thanks,

Gabby

On 03/02/2011 22:26, Torsten Schassan wrote:

> Hi,
>
>> On 03/02/11 17:34, Dot Porter wrote:
>>>
>>> This does mean that you have to pick on identifier as the primary
>>> one.
>
>
> Am 03.02.2011 20:37, schrieb Matthew James Driscoll:
>> This was the whole point, in fact: you could have multiple<altIdentifier>  elements where there was no primary identifier, as in the case of "scattered" or dispersed MSS, parts of which are found in different repositories.
>
>
> Isn't it that we have to really distinguish some cases here?
>
> - If the fragments are now held together under a new shelfmark and the
> other numbers are only referrers, it would have to be msIdentifier/idno
> plus a series of altIdentifiers (cf. some remarks on this at the
> bottom.) If I understood Gabby right this is his case.
>
> - If the fragments were still separated but considered to have belonged
> to one manuscript and shall (virtually) be described as one, it would be
> the case Matthew drew upon. In this case one would use only altIdentifiers.
>
> But:
>
> - If the fragments were still sparated and if it is still valid what we
> discussed some time ago, that with TEI only *existing* things could be
> described (and therefore one could not describe something that is not
> there but only known to have been there), we would have to go for Dot's
> version: focus on one (existing) manuscript, which can be identified by
> msIdentifier and relate this ms (closely) to others. altIdentifier
> "feels" not completely right here but could be an option anyway?
>
> To follow up on that (and what I mentioned already above): In the course
> of the Europeana Regia project we worked a bit on the ENRICH ODD and we
> want to propose the following list of values for altIdentifier/@type. Do
> they sound reasonable, is something missing or unclear?
>
> access = accession number
> alternative = alternative writing
> catalog = number in a catalogue
> collection = a manuscript that has been grouped together with other
> manuscripts for some reason
> faulty = faulty shelfmark, but used in some literature
> former = former shelfmark
> internal = internal project identifier
> multivolume = mss is part of a multivolume and therefore has more than
> one shelfmark
> other = unspecified
> palimpsest = identifier of a previously written but deleted item
> partial = identifier of a previously distinct item
> system = former system identifier (Manuscriptorium specific)
>
>
>
> Best, Torsten
>

--
Dr Gabriel BODARD
(Research Associate in Digital Epigraphy)

Centre for Computing in the Humanities
King's College London
26-29 Drury Lane
London WC2B 5RL
Email: [hidden email]
Tel: +44 (0)20 7848 1388
Fax: +44 (0)20 7848 2980

http://www.digitalclassicist.org/
http://www.currentepigraphy.org/
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: multiple msIdentifiers

Torsten Schassan-2
In reply to this post by Gabriel BODARD
Hi Gabby,

> (In my case, the multiple fragments have now been
> brought together and may even be recorded together in a database, but
> the original accession numbers are still used to record the individual
> fragments [234a and 256b, say], while the text is recorded as "belonging
> to" accession 234a+256b. I suppose one could call that the new idno, but
> it wouldn't be quite right [and would cause lookup problems].)

one thing I forgot: If the fragments were "united" by the institution,
the right encoding of the description would be to use msPart, each
having altIdentifier in the place where msDesc has msIdentifier! Thus it
wouldn't be the structure of msIdentifier you had to keep an eye upon
but the structure of the whole manuscript.

Best, Torsten

--
Torsten Schassan
Digitale Editionen
Abteilung Handschriften und Sondersammlungen
Herzog August Bibliothek, Postfach 1364, D-38299 Wolfenbuettel
Tel.: +49-5331-808-130 (Fax -165), schassan {at} hab.de

http://www.hab.de/forschung/projekte/europeana-regia.htm
http://www.hab.de/forschung/projekte/weiss64.htm
Loading...