Date:         Wed, 21 Nov 2007 16:12:40 -0500
Reply-To:     Metadata Object Description Schema List <[log in to unmask]>
Sender:       Metadata Object Description Schema List <[log in to unmask]>
From:         "Rebecca S. Guenther" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:      Re: MODS for book review
Comments: To: Metadata Object Description Schema List <[log in to unmask]>
In-Reply-To:  <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

Yes, it seems more appropriate in relatedItem. It would be good to hear
from other MODS users about the need for this and what to call it. It
isn't clear whether "references" is the right term-- Joe has a good
suggestion that needs some further discussion.

Rebecca

On Wed, 21 Nov 2007, Joe Altimus wrote:

> Jenn, thanks for raising a topic I've been thinking about too.
> 
> I agree that relatedItem is the best choice.
> 
> However, I think defining a new type value "reviews" (or "reviewOf" or
> similar) for relatedItem will better serve those who want to provide
> retrieval services for that type of resource. It would be an attractive
> option to code for that specific type in faculty citations in our digital
> repository and offer advanced search options for publications that are
> reviews.
> 
> [MARC 21 has not defined a linking field specifically for a review, but
> UNIMARC has (field tag 470 "Item Reviewed"), and I've seen it used
> effectively in records.]
> 
> Joe Altimus
> Arizona State University Libraries
> 
> On Nov 18, 2007 2:09 PM, Riley, Jenn <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> 
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I'm trying to create a MODS template for book reviews, and I can't figure
> > out a good way to indicate the book that's being reviewed.
> >
> > In one sense, the book being reviewed is a subject, and one could use
> > subject/titleInfo, but this doesn't let you say anything else about the
> > book. My immediate need is just for recording title and author of the
> > reviewed work, but also including name under subject together with the
> > title
> > feels wrong somehow. And it doesn't scale to including publication info,
> > etc.
> >
> > relatedItem seems like a more robust option, but none of the enumerated
> > types is appropriate for this case. There's a type="isReferencedBy" - how
> > about adding type="references" in a future version of MODS? This could be
> > used to record the bibliography of a text, as well.
> >
> > The only solution I can think of for now is relatedItem without a type,
> > but
> > with a displayLabel indicating the relationship, but this is of course a
> > hack. :-) Any other ideas?
> >
> > Jenn
> >
> > ========================
> > Jenn Riley
> > Metadata Librarian
> > Digital Library Program
> > Indiana University - Bloomington
> > Wells Library E170
> > (812) 856-5759
> > www.dlib.indiana.edu
> >
> > Inquiring Librarian blog: www.inquiringlibrarian.blogspot.com
> >
>