#400 msItem shd permit model.biblLike rather than bibl

closed-accepted
Lou Burnard
5
2012-10-31
2012-10-31
Lou Burnard
No

The content model for msItem currently explicitly references bibl and listBibl. It would be more appropriate to reference model.biblLike. This would permit inclusion of biblStrruct. There is a significant real case for projects such as the BVH at Tours, where msDesc is used to document copy-specific information for items also containing full bibliographic descriptions. At present, they embed a biblStruct inside a <p> inside <msContents> which is not very pretty. And won't work if they ever find a printed work containing two distinct bibliographic items.

Discussion

  • that seems like a no-brainer to me. those over-explicit content models in msdesc are anomalous

     
  • Lou Burnard
    Lou Burnard
    2012-10-31

    At rev 3575433, added biblStruct to model.msItemPart for consistency with bibl. A better solution might be to make model.biblLike a subclass of model.msItemPart -- which would then allow biblFull as well.

     
  • Lou Burnard
    Lou Burnard
    2012-10-31

    • status: open --> open-accepted
     
  • Lou Burnard
    Lou Burnard
    2012-10-31

    At rev 3575433, added biblStruct to model.msItemPart for consistency with bibl. A better solution might be to make model.biblLike a subclass of model.msItemPart -- which would then allow biblFull as well.

     
  • Lou Burnard
    Lou Burnard
    2012-10-31

    • status: open-accepted --> closed-accepted
     
  • James Cummings
    James Cummings
    2012-11-02

    @louburnard But would biblFull make sense there? Surely a msDesc is about a manuscript (or similar object) and biblFull meant for digitally-born documents? How can one of the msItems be digitally born?

    Unless you're saying we want to reference digitally born editions of this msItem... I suppose that makes sense. (In which case make it model.biblLike I'd say.