From atge at kb.dk Thu Nov 15 09:38:51 2018 From: atge at kb.dk (Axel Teich Geertinger) Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2018 08:38:51 +0000 Subject: [mei-catalog-ig] FW: MerMEId Newsletter November 2018 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5ca7b8555d0c4bb787ebdabc0e8ce4fc@kb.dk> Dear list Please allow me to forward to you the latest MerMEId newsletter. You can find past issues in the archive. Also feel free to subscribe, if you like. Please use the subscription form on this page: http://www.kb.dk/en/nb/dcm/projekter/mermeid.html Best wishes, Axel From: MerMEId / Axel Geertinger Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2018 9:11 AM Subject: MerMEId Newsletter November 2018 View this email in your browser [https://gallery.mailchimp.com/b14f54cf7b3c6654a3909c990/images/206ecceb-2d0d-47cc-a798-3f5994761ced.png] Newsletter ● November 2018 Release: MerMEId 2018 After a long period of continuous development we have decided to make a proper release version of MerMEId before starting a major reworking of parts of the software. You will find the MerMEId 2018 release on Github. It includes the enhancements described in earlier newsletters. Uploading MEI encodings of the music is a new feature added in this release. When working with both metadata and music encodings (the information kept in in and elements, respectively), you will probably want to combine the two parts at some point. This can be done in any XML editor, of course, but if you want to avoid having to download your files from MerMEId, merging the two parts in an editor and upload the files again, you can now upload the music encoding directly into your files in MerMEId. It works similar to the uploading mechanism for encoded incipits introduced a couple of years ago. Upcoming: MEI 4.0.0 and software upgrades Still enjoying support from the Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, we are already heading towards the next major release scheduled for Spring/Summer 2019. The next release will address the following issues: * Moving to MEI 4.0.0. As you may have noticed, a new version of the MEI schema was released last week. The new schema includes a number of changes to the MEI header. The next MerMEId release will be based on MEI 4.0.0, but of course we will provide a transformation to help you migrate existing data to the new version. * Upgrading to eXist 4.4 or newer. We are making the changes necessary to make MerMEId work with new versions of the eXist database. Our changes are aiming at eXist version 4.4 but will probably work with eXist 5 as well. * Simplifying infrastructure. The Java applet known as MerMEId's "filter" will be removed from the next release to make the entire setup simpler. The filter takes care of handling requests between the editing interface (handled by Orbeon) and the database (eXist) and transforming the data on the way as necessary. This functionality will be handled by eXist (in XQuery) in the future. Simplification comes at a price, however: The Java filter also made it possible to forward user credentials to Orbeon, allowing automatic logging of user names in (the MEI change log). This feature will be lost, requiring users to manually enter their names or initials in the change log entry. * Installation. Getting rid of the Java applet makes several installation steps obsolete. Furthermore, the next release will have an entirely re-written installation manual. You may have a look at it already: there will be one for the standard installation and one for Docker installation. DCM's catalogue user interface It's been on Github for a long time, but in case other projects want to base an online catalogue on the same interface as the Scheibe, Nielsen, and Hartmann catalogues, we have done an effort to document the installation process. Find the code and the manual at Github. New publications based on MerMEId We are happy to annonce that two catalogues created with MerMEId – one online and one printed – have been published this year: * Frederick Delius Catalogue of Works Edited by Joanna Bullivant and Daniel Grimley, University of Oxford, in cooperation with the British Library. The catalogue has just won the BL Labs Research Award. Congratulations! * Johann Ernst Bach: Thematisch-systematisches Verzeichnis der musikalischen Werke Edited by Klaus Rettinghaus, Bach-Repertorium, Leipzig. Best wishes, Axel [https://gallery.mailchimp.com/b14f54cf7b3c6654a3909c990/images/fd8a0d43-72cb-46ea-b72d-51f07424f66c.png] Copyright © 2018 The Royal Library, Copenhagen, All rights reserved. You are receiving this email because you have subscribed to this newsletter at our website. Our mailing address is: The Royal Library, Copenhagen P.O. Box 2149 Copenhagen 1016 Denmark Add us to your address book Want to change how you receive these emails? You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list [Email Marketing Powered by Mailchimp] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From dubowy at mozarteum.at Thu Nov 15 10:17:59 2018 From: dubowy at mozarteum.at (Norbert Dubowy Internationale Stiftung Mozarteum) Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2018 10:17:59 +0100 Subject: [mei-catalog-ig] Persistent identifier for digital music editions Message-ID: <20181115101759.EGroupware.QY0a-nPZZNpiGHCt0XuRUJv@_> Dear metadata and cataloging IG, As we are close to publishing our first set of digital editions, I would like to hear your opinion on the following subject: Does it make sense to provide a persistent identifier with the edition (in the individual file / MEI header)? What is the benefit, and is there any preference of what kind of identifier (DOI, or urn, or ...) to use in the case of a strictly digital music edition (no hybrid edition, not the rendering, just the coding)? Thanks, N. Dr. Norbert Dubowy Mozart-Institut/Digitale Mozart-Edition Cheflektor/Managing Editor Internationale Stiftung Mozarteum Schwarzstr. 26 5020 Salzburg, Austria T +43 (0) 662 889 40 66 F +43 (0) 662 889 40 68 E mailto:dubowy at mozarteum.at [ http://www.mozarteum.at/ -> www.mozarteum.at ] [ http://www.mozarteum.at/content/newsletter -> Newsletter Stiftung Mozarteum ] [ http://www.facebook.com/StiftungMozarteum -> Facebook Stiftung Mozarteum ] ZVR: 438729131, UID: ATU33977907 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stadler at edirom.de Mon Nov 19 17:10:27 2018 From: stadler at edirom.de (Peter Stadler) Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2018 17:10:27 +0100 Subject: [mei-catalog-ig] Persistent identifier for digital music editions In-Reply-To: <20181115101759.EGroupware.QY0a-nPZZNpiGHCt0XuRUJv@_> References: <20181115101759.EGroupware.QY0a-nPZZNpiGHCt0XuRUJv@_> Message-ID: <6299861E-3A98-4093-B84B-7168D4919B47@edirom.de> I like persistent identifiers because it promises persistence to the user :) It signals that this edition is there to stay and some people (or institution) do care about it. Which sort of (technical) system to implement? I don’t know … Best Peter > Am 15.11.2018 um 10:17 schrieb Norbert Dubowy Internationale Stiftung Mozarteum : > > ​Dear metadata and cataloging IG, > As we are close to publishing our first set of digital editions, I would like to hear your opinion on the following subject: Does it make sense to provide a persistent identifier with the edition (in the individual file / MEI header)? What is the benefit, and is there any preference of what kind of identifier (DOI, or urn, or ...) to use in the case of a strictly digital music edition (no hybrid edition, not the rendering, just the coding)? > > Thanks, > N. > > > Dr. Norbert Dubowy > Mozart-Institut/Digitale Mozart-Edition > Cheflektor/Managing Editor > Internationale Stiftung Mozarteum > Schwarzstr. 26 > 5020 Salzburg, Austria > T +43 (0) 662 889 40 66 > F +43 (0) 662 889 40 68 > E dubowy at mozarteum.at > www.mozarteum.at > > Newsletter Stiftung Mozarteum > Facebook Stiftung Mozarteum > ZVR: 438729131, UID: ATU33977907 > > _______________________________________________ > mei-catalog-ig mailing list > mei-catalog-ig at lists.uni-paderborn.de > https://lists.uni-paderborn.de/mailman/listinfo/mei-catalog-ig -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 488 bytes Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP URL: From from.mei-l at jdlh.com Thu Nov 22 08:21:51 2018 From: from.mei-l at jdlh.com (Jim DeLaHunt) Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2018 23:21:51 -0800 Subject: [mei-catalog-ig] Persistent identifier for digital music editions In-Reply-To: <20181115101759.EGroupware.QY0a-nPZZNpiGHCt0XuRUJv@_> References: <20181115101759.EGroupware.QY0a-nPZZNpiGHCt0XuRUJv@_> Message-ID: Dr. Dubowy: On 2018-11-15 01:17, Norbert Dubowy Internationale Stiftung Mozarteum wrote: > ​Dear metadata and cataloging IG, > As we are close to publishing our first set of digital editions, I > would like to hear your opinion on the following subject: Does it make > sense to provide a persistent identifier with the edition (in the > individual file / MEI header)? What is the benefit, and is there any > preference of what kind of identifier (DOI, or urn, or ...) to use in > the case of a strictly digital music edition (no hybrid edition, not > the rendering, just the coding)? ... This is a very insightful question. I am no musicologist or academic, but I would like to reply as someone interested in transcribing the legacy corpus of public domain scores to digital score formats , and as an experienced software engineer. Yes, I encourage you to put in a stable machine-readable identifier with the edition. And, I encourage you to thoughtful and clear about what that identifier refers to, and what it does not refer to. Identifiers make many tasks easier. For a digital score, being able to refer to an edition, and the work of musical composition it represents, and the specific revision within an edition, are all important and useful. The identifier should be in a format which software can find and read within the digital score, and which humans can also find, and copy and paste (e.g. into an email). The identifier should be stable — once assigned, it should not change. The identifier should be unique — no other thing should ever have an identifier which could be confused with this identifier. I am not aware of a system of identifiers for music score editions. If there is one, someone please cite it, so I can learn about it. If there is not one, you may have to make your own system of identifiers.  There are identifiers for works of musical composition, but there may be many editions of the same work. There are library catalogue call numbers, e.g. in WorldCat, but as far as I know these are specific to each library, and two identical copies of the same printed score could have different WorldCat numbers from different libraries. It would be valuable to have a catalogue of edition identifiers which would lead different people in those libraries to come up with the same edition number for their identical copies. Consider how you will handle revisions. I believe the lesson of electronic text and software publishing is that revisions become more and more numerous and frequent as the representation becomes more symbolic and digital. Where a book might have only one or two editions, and one or four or ten printings, the same content as a wiki or software repository might have hundreds of numbered versions, for one "edition". It is valuable to have a stable identifier which represents what is stable and continuing about the edition, and a separate revision identifier to which represents what changes within those stable boundaries. There are a few widely-used and trustworthy systems of identifiers I know of, which might be useful for your purposes. MusicBrainz assigns Work MBID s for compositions, and Artist MBID s for people and groups. For instance, the identifier is a stable identifier for a person known as Чайковский, Tchaikovsky, and Tschaikowski. The identifier refers to the 1875 version of 9ddd7abc's /Concerto for Piano and Orchestra no. 1 op. 23/, while the identifier refers to an 1879 revision of that same concerto. MusicBrainz does not have score edition identifiers, that I know of.  But where they have identifers (for Work and Artist and Release and more), they are unique, stable, reliable, and useful. Wikidata assigns identifiers for many kinds of things. The identifier Q7315 is the identifier for the composer Musicbrainz identifies as artist/ddd7abc-9e1b-471d-8031-583bc6bc8be9. The identifier Q162935 refers to both the 1875 and the 1879 versions of that concerto which MusicBrainz identifies as work/ba27a04b-1a26-4771-909e-81b2f8449ff7 and work/71b01883-7b2d-488b-91cc-d0d44f182743 .  Wikidata is also good at maintaining lists of identifiers in other systems for the things it identifies, so it is a powerful identifier cross-reference resource. It is also possible to compute stable unique identifiers for the content of "just the coding", that is of arbitrary. This is done with tools which can reduce any content (byte sequence) of any length down to a "digest", consisting of a predefined number of binary bytes, that is unlikely to match the digest of any other content.  Such digests are known of names like "md5", "sha1", and "sha256". The sha-1 digest of the preceding paragraph is 426eae7043658f83d2c1e50d77f29b20bb3434e1 . The sha-256 digest is 71fa49b4fa7c6fbe77d4e681c6168ba0eb49c5ba816ae218750a03ca5f265103 . So, you could choose to define the edition identifier for "just the coding" as the digest of the MEI-format text of the digital score itself. Every change to the content, the "coding", will result in a different digest. A definition like this requires defining a "canonical form" for the MEI-format text, and defining what to do about the space in the score for edition identifier when calculating the edition identifier. Standards like XML signing and XML comparison have come up with those definitions, however. I am sorry this is not a specific reply to your question. I hope it is helpful in giving you ideas for deciding what edition identifiers you will use. Best regards,         —Jim DeLaHunt, Vancouver, Canada On 2018-11-15 01:17, Norbert Dubowy Internationale Stiftung Mozarteum wrote: > ​Dear metadata and cataloging IG, > As we are close to publishing our first set of digital editions, I > would like to hear your opinion on the following subject: Does it make > sense to provide a persistent identifier with the edition (in the > individual file / MEI header)? What is the benefit, and is there any > preference of what kind of identifier (DOI, or urn, or ...) to use in > the case of a strictly digital music edition (no hybrid edition, not > the rendering, just the coding)? > > Thanks, > N. > > *Dr. Norbert Dubowy * > Mozart-Institut/Digitale Mozart-Edition > Cheflektor/ManagingEditor > > Internationale Stiftung Mozarteum > Schwarzstr. 26 > 5020 Salzburg, Austria > T +43 (0) 662 889 40 66 > F +43 (0) 662 889 40 68 > E dubowy at mozarteum.at > www.mozarteum.at > > Newsletter Stiftung Mozarteum > Facebook Stiftung Mozarteum > ZVR: 438729131, UID: ATU33977907 > > > _______________________________________________ > mei-catalog-ig mailing list > mei-catalog-ig at lists.uni-paderborn.de > https://lists.uni-paderborn.de/mailman/listinfo/mei-catalog-ig -- --Jim DeLaHunt,jdlh at jdlh.com http://blog.jdlh.com/ (http://jdlh.com/) multilingual websites consultant 355-1027 Davie St, Vancouver BC V6E 4L2, Canada Canada mobile +1-604-376-8953 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: