<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Helvetica;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Helvetica;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";
color:black;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body bgcolor=white lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Kristina poses interesting questions. Instinctively I would go for “composer”, “encoder,” etc and err on the side of being verbose and explicit. With electronic data, being able to track who encoded what (with version number and date) can be very valuable. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>I find labels such as “creator” and “corporate name” very unwieldy, particularly when working in a second language (in my case usually Italian). Italian bibliographical databases a full of these kinds of terms, but there is something subtly cultural about the misunderstandings they can create. The various instantiations of a single work can have many creators—a composer, an arranger, and editor, a translator of the text, and in the case of recording a conductor, performer, performing group, etc. Because they can all pertain to a single work, a general label deprives the user of knowing what the role of each one was. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>A much messier area is dating. A single work can have an almost endless number of “year”s—of composition, publication, first performance, revision <1..n>, arrangement, recording, text translation, etc. There too being more specific saves time for those searching. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Best regards,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Eleanor<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;color:#1F497D'>Eleanor Selfridge-Field<br>Consulting Professor, Music (and, by courtesy, Symbolic Systems)<br>Braun Music Center #129<br>Stanford University<br>Stanford, CA 94305-3076, USA<br><a href="http://www.stanford.edu/~esfield/"><span style='color:blue'>http://www.stanford.edu/~esfield/</span></a></span><span style='color:#1F497D'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:windowtext'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:windowtext'> mei-l-bounces@lists.uni-paderborn.de [mailto:mei-l-bounces@lists.uni-paderborn.de] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Kristina Richts<br><b>Sent:</b> Monday, February 04, 2013 9:55 AM<br><b>To:</b> mei-l@lists.uni-paderborn.de<br><b>Subject:</b> [MEI-L] Encoding of personal names<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"'>Dear all,<br><br>during the work on the MEI sample collection, questions appeared on how to encode the creators of each electronic file correctly.<br>In MEI2012 the normal path (or better said: the way, we first chose to encode it) was to encode several <persName>-elements within the statement of responsibilty. A differentiation between several involved persons only became apparent through additional @role-attributes, i.e. <br><respStmt><br> <persName role="composer">Anton Webern</persName><br> <persName role="creator">John Doe</persName> </span><br><span style='font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"'></respStmt><br><br>In a second step we decided not to encode ourselves as "creators" of the file (although we are), but as "encoders" and to assign the composer of the encoded work as creator, i.e.<br></span><br><span style='font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"'><respStmt><br> <persName role="creator">Anton Webern</persName><br> <persName role="encoder">John Doe</persName> <br></respStmt><br><br>The decision is based on the fact, that we encode the <u>intellectual creation</u> of a composer's work. We tried to keep up the distinction between the composer and the encoder. <br><br>MEI2013 will offer some new elements to specify the role of persons, organizations etc. a bit more: <creator>, <contributor>, <editor>, <funder> and <sponsor>. <br>In this regard it is now the question how to encode this best:<br> </span><br><span style='font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"'><respStmt><br> <creator> <br> <persName>Anton Webern</persName><br> </creator><br> <creator><br> <persName>John Doe</persName> <br> </creator><br></respStmt><br><br>or<br></span><br><span style='font-family:"Helvetica","sans-serif"'><respStmt><br> <creator> <br> <persName role="composer">Anton Webern</persName><br> </creator><br> <creator><br> <persName role="encoder">John Doe</persName> <br> </creator><br></respStmt><br>?<br><br>We first thought, it would be a good idea, to add a <composer> element to the list. But that alone would not be sufficient, as the creative aspect regarding musical works is difficult to manage. In this case, we would rather have to extend the list by adding some more elements like <arranger>, <lyricist>, etc. But this can soon become very unwieldy.<br><br>I have to admit that I don't prefer to encode detailed specifications only within child elements. However, if we choose to maintain the 'more detailed elements', I would at least like to see some mandatory child elements, such as <persName>, <name>, <corpName> etc., in there. <br><br>When thinking about all this, I came to the conclusion, that it might be enough to allow a <creator> and a <contributor> element (with some mandatory child elements). I am not even sure, if we should offer a separate <editor> element or if an editor should be considered as a contributor as well.<br>What is to be said against a specification of the role on the <creator> or <contributor> element? Wouldn't this make things easier to handle for the encoder, who might not know as much about the encoding of persNames with MEI?<br><br> <br>Any comments on this?<br><br>Best,<br>Kristina</span><o:p></o:p></p></div></body></html>