Variation in funder names #129
Comments
|
@kontovasBodleian Thanks for raising this; however, it's tricky as we need to flexibly add and remove various funder who sign on and off at various points. I also see inconsistencies so I'll need to consult to correct those. Also, does the order in which they appear really matter? While we're at it, shall we add IDs and links to these? Only I note that we currently do not index , only entries, hence quite a few corporate names I've entered in do not currently appear, for which I hestitate to use . |
|
Hey, @JakeBenson . Thanks for responding! That's totally fine. I wasn't suggesting they should all be the same, just that the names of the individual funders should probably be consistent throughout the system, and whatever the official name of the funding body is. Also, the order doesn't matter at all, but again, it might be nice to be consistent. Any data entry system I build would have the flexibility to add/modify funders built in at some level. I'm just looking at this data now to try and get a feel for how things are currently in the records that already exist and what our needs might be from a data entry system going forward. I am not sure I understand the last part of your response. I think maybe some tags got garbled because they weren't embedded in tick marks? In any case, the list I shared is also only generated on the basis of the text content of the |
|
Also, I'm not sure about how kosher this is in terms of our implementation of TEI, but maybe it would be a good idea to put each funder in a separate |
|
Yup, I just asked colleagues about this. I see some grouped as they co-sponsored at the same time, but they probably should be separated as you suggest. While at it, I also see we can add date tags (when=, or from= and to=) to indicate funding periods. Maybe <orgName ref=> can add hyperlinks to funders sites, only the preview tool omits that part, so I can’t tell if it will work or not. Adding the usual VIAF ref in that case seems pointless. Perhaps just add instead? |
|
I would be in favor of adding links to I see where you're coming from with |
|
Thanks, we need to indicate funding for both record creation and subsequent enhancements that I make. I see some of our records have dual publication dates. However, I’ve not added a new publication date.
Note that I also add <custHist> to document exhibitions and associated funders. We just discussed adding any funding for imaging there too (major conservation should also be reported there as well). Only <custHist> won’t take <funder> so I used <orgName> there.
<custodialHist>
<custEvent type="exhibition" from="1992-09-09" to="1992-12-21">
<p>Exhibited in <title>Gilded Word and Radiant Image</title> at the John Rylands Library, sponsored
by <orgName ref="http://viaf.org/viaf/122924270" role="spn fnd"
key="person_122924270">Altajir Trust</orgName>, <date
from="1992-09-09" to="1992-12-21">9 Sept. to 21 Dec.
1992</date>.</p>
</custEvent>
</custodialHist>
Perhaps there’s a better way to note this?
Thanks,
jb
From: Nicholas Kontovas (professional account) ***@***.***>
Date: Thursday, 20 April 2023 at 13:24
To: fihristorg/fihrist-mss ***@***.***>
Cc: Jake Benson ***@***.***>, Mention ***@***.***>
Subject: Re: [fihristorg/fihrist-mss] Variation in funder names (Issue #129)
I would be in favor of adding links to<funder> tags -- though TEI suggests that attribute ref is allowed directly on <funder>, so it may not be necessary to add a child <orgName> or something.
I see where you're coming from with to and from attributes, but I was under the impression that people only added the funding bodies relevant at the time that an individual record was created, which would sort of make adding those attributes a moot point.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<#129 (comment)>, or unsubscribe<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AOOYKC6UIVHZY4A4NZLNZOTXCETIDANCNFSM6AAAAAAXFHWDQ4>.
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>
|
|
Aha, gotcha! We could still do this sort of stuff in the contexts you mention but keep the That'd be a good discussion for the whole team, though, if we think we might want to record that sort of information. |
|
Elizabeth responds: "Using means that we could in future add in a logo if funders wanted one (see https://msdesc.github.io/consolidated-tei-schema/msdesc.html 1.4.1.1. Title Statement)." This is a feature we want to add to display in MDC, but in view of this, it's something to consider for Fihrist as well? We currently only display repository logos, but no funders. However, the more we show our appreciation, the more they return! @yf227 Any thoughts? |
|
Multiple funder elements are valid and will display on the Fihrist web site as multiple paragraphs. Attributes are also valid but will not be displayed. In general, any information you consider of interest to readers should be included in the content of the elements. Attributes are there to add machine-readable data on top. |
This is one of a series of issues I'll be posting about concerning things I notice as I put together my data entry system.
There seems to be some variation in the way that funder names are indicated in the records. Cambridge and Manchester in particular have several funders which seem to be the same. See the table below for details:
If the people responsible for these institutions (@yf227 and @JakeBenson, I gather) have suggestions as to how to regularise these, I can go ahead and fix them accordingly.
Also, are there any funding bodies for any of the institutions missing? Let me know and, as long as they apply to all the records in a single collection, I can add them.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: