Work at SourceForge, help us to make it a better place! We have an immediate need for a Support Technician in our San Francisco or Denver office.

Close

#393 availability

AMBER
open
Lou Burnard
1(low)
2014-06-06
2012-10-08
Torsten Schassan
No

Right now if used within msDesc, availability has to be used as child of adminInfo, thus I tend to understand that it describes the availability of the manuscript/the text bearing object. If it should describe the availability of the description it might have to be placed (and thus to be allowed) within recordHist.

If we want to allow to distinguish between the two cases it might be necessary to add to the definition this object-related aspect, e.g. "supplies information about the availability of a text or of an object"

Discussion

  • BODARD Gabriel
    BODARD Gabriel
    2012-10-08

    • labels: 1154492 -->
     
  • Additionally, a backlink to 10.9.1.2 is missing in the description of the element.

     
  • Lou Burnard
    Lou Burnard
    2013-01-04

    The availability of the *description* is surely defined in the TEI Header of the document containing it. I cannot believe anyone would want to mke a single TEI document containing multiple <msDesc>s each with different access permissions. If they do, they should be discouraged!

     
  • Lou Burnard
    Lou Burnard
    2013-01-04

    • labels: --> TEI: New or Changed Element
     
  • I agree, the text of the catalogue (printed or not) may have its rights declared in a teiHeader belonging to the catalogue. But there may be circumstances where a msDesc can "travel" (be re-used) as single item without context.

    Theoretical (but not absurd) example: a TEI file for a ms, with transcriptions inside <text> and a digital representation in <facsimile>. But as well, several <msDesc>s in <sourceDesc>, some of them under copyright, some no more. How to distinguish which rights (to be declared in publicationStmt/availabiltiy) belong to which description? Pointers?

    Even now, descriptions, facsimile, and transcription/edition of a ms might (usually do) run with different rights declarations. Those aren't addressed either, are they?

     
  • James Cummings
    James Cummings
    2013-01-08

    Assigning to myself; setting Group as RED since needs further discussion.

     
  • James Cummings
    James Cummings
    2013-01-08

    • milestone: --> RED
    • assigned_to: nobody --> jcummings
     
  • James Cummings
    James Cummings
    2013-11-13

    Council face-to-face 2013-11 assigning to LB making Amber.

     
  • James Cummings
    James Cummings
    2013-11-13

    • assigned_to: James Cummings --> Lou Burnard
    • Group: RED --> AMBER
    • Priority: 5 --> 1(low)
     
  • Lou Burnard
    Lou Burnard
    2014-05-19

    The use case Thorsten describes above (different availabilitys for different msdescs in a single document) could be addressed by using @decls. <availability> is already a member of att.declarable, but <msDesc> is not currently a member of att.declaring. I suggest that adding it to that class would be an easy way of resolving this issue.

     
  • Lou Burnard
    Lou Burnard
    2014-06-06

    Made <msDesc> declaring as of rev 12909. Another option would be to add <availability> as a child of <recordHist>