Date:         Fri, 5 Dec 2003 12:02:58 -0500
Reply-To:     Metadata Object Description Schema List <[log in to unmask]>
Sender:       Metadata Object Description Schema List <[log in to unmask]>
From:         "Houghton,Andrew" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:      Re: genres and governments records
Comments: To: Metadata Object Description Schema List <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

> From: Bruce D'Arcus [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Subject: Re: [MODS] genres and governments records
>
> On Friday, December 5, 2003, at 10:27 AM, Karen Coyle wrote:
>
> If we want the genre element in MODS to include any genre from any
> metadata, then it should be a text field, not a controlled list. A
> controlled list only makes sense if you have some reason to keep
> control, i.e. there's some particular meaning to the list that you don't
> want to see violated.

This was one of my complaints about MODS, over a year ago, and indicated
on this list in several messages.  MODS takes too much from MARC-21 with
the idea that only its controlled lists can be used and they are hard
coded into the Schema without anyway to use alternate controlled lists,
without directly modifying the XML Schema.  Many metadata communities will
just not use MARC-21 code lists since they have their own and thus will
create their own metadata formats rather than reusing MODS.

So I will reiterate the direction that I would like to see MODS move
towards: controlled lists in MODS should be URI based or use a URI for
the "controlling authority" along with the term from the controlled
list, so that other metadata communities can plug in their own controlled
lists.  Doing that would still be in alignment with CORES work that LC has
already undertaken.


Andy.