Date:         Thu, 8 May 2003 14:38:31 -0500
Reply-To:     Metadata Encoding and Transmission Standard
              <[log in to unmask]>
Sender:       Metadata Encoding and Transmission Standard
              <[log in to unmask]>
From:         Jeremy Morse <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:      Re: Full-Text Markup
Comments: To: Metadata Encoding and Transmission Standard <[log in to unmask]>
In-Reply-To:  <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed

At 02:00 PM 5/5/2003 -0400, Jerome McDonough wrote:
>Actually, the structural metadata *doesn't* have to be the same; technically,
>they don't have to resemble each other in the slightest, although admittedly
>it would be rather odd if the didn't.  But the structural metadata in the METS
>structMap might be an abbreviated form of that in the TEI file (redundant,
>but abridged); you might also have a structural map which identified
>structural features in a TEI file that the TEI file itself didn't
>specifically mark
>(unlikely, but feasible and possible).

We're looking into using METS as a solution for page-image display of a
TEI-encoded 20 volume text.  In one proposed approach, the TEI document (by
definition of TEI) marks up the text according to its intellectual
structure (div = volume/chapter/section), and the METS structMap marks it
up according to its physical structure (div = volume/page).  There would be
some redundancy between the two (we have the page-breaks indicated in the
TEI), yet they're two distinct representations of the structure of the work.


>>Anyhow: What is the advantage of storing fulltext directly in the METS
>>file? (serious question).
>
>Serious answer: there are advantages from a preservation perspective
>in having metadata for a content file *very* closely bound with that content
>file.

We've considered the option of embedding the TEI directly within METS, but
I wonder if it would complicate matters more than it would simplify
them.  For instance, we would conceivably want to add deeper mark-up to a
text after it has been "in production", and we might want a student to
perform that work; yet I'm pretty sure we wouldn't want that student
mucking around in a large METS document.









Jeremy Morse
Digital Preservation Specialist
Northwestern University Library
(847) 467-1379
[log in to unmask]