-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Convention for giving a title to a document? #1
Comments
I imagine we will use the title from the Discovery Catalogue for the roll in question, which should in turn become the title in the ISAD(G) statement for the record. |
We should use the Discovery description where appropriate, I agree. It may be we are able to add our own amendments or revisions upon detailed analysis - Discovery can always be changed! |
Ok, using the Description in the CSV file sent by Paul, the title for the example would change from ...
to ...
Does this give enough details/context? |
Membranes should be in the extent. |
We will go with:
Needs further discussion on dates and their representation. |
Ok, I think we agreed to use Discovery as a basis, but with the option to amend or provide a more meaningful or descriptive title. In the case of the example, we've gone with:
|
hi Mike, I am worried that we are mixing up here the Title and Reference Code. I would prefer if the title was in the form "Receipt roll of the Irish Exchequer for 29 and 30 Edward I", and we keep the reference code "The National Archives, E 101/233/16" distinct. The reason for this is to future proof. If we were, in the future, doing a TEI edition of a Memoranda Roll, there would be no original, so the Title would be "Memoranda roll of the Irish Exchequer for 29 and 30 Edward I", but there could be multiple replacement sources whose reference codes would need to be included. Does that make any sense? Peter |
Of course. I think I misunderstood. I'll fix that now.
…On Fri, 11 Sep 2020 at 09:54, crooksp ***@***.***> wrote:
hi Mike,
I am worried that we are mixing up here the Title and Reference Code. I
would prefer if the title was in the form "Receipt roll of the Irish
Exchequer for 29 and 30 Edward I", and we keep the reference code "The
National Archives, E 101/233/16" distinct.
The reason for this is to future proof. If we were, in the future, doing a
TEI edition of a Memoranda Roll, there would be no original, so the Title
would be "Memoranda roll of the Irish Exchequer for 29 and 30 Edward I",
but there could be multiple replacement sources whose reference codes would
need to be included.
Does that make any sense?
Peter
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#1 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAAH5R53C4WPKAI2R7YHKZTSFHQVXANCNFSM4PTEN4DQ>
.
|
No problem -- this bit of conceptualization is the hardest thing to imagine in the abstract, and I am still working it out. At the next step, let's involve Gary to check our logic and choices. |
I've updated the example. |
Just to be clear, there's nothing wrong with putting the reference code in the title if you like, but the database won't know to look for it there. If you want to fetch manuscript E 101, then this code must appear in the reference code DB database table. That being said, for display purposes, you may like to have the reference code in the title. But that is entirely up to what you want to see in a title field when rendering a document on a web page. Of course, we can automatically append a reference code to the title if both are in the DB. |
What will be the convention on naming the document? This might be what appears in search results.
In the example, I've based it of the series as described in Paul's stylebook but added the regnal year. If we refer to The National Archives should it be disambiguated, e.g. 'The National Archives, Kew'?
Example title:
See https://www.tei-c.org/release/doc/tei-p5-doc/en/html/ref-titleStmt.html
See https://www.tei-c.org/release/doc/tei-p5-doc/en/html/ref-title.html
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: