[MEI-L] relateditem and relations between mei elements

[Roland, Perry (pdr4h)]

Axel,

I've given more thought to my statement earlier about adding <relateditem> to <filedesc> and to the use of <relateditem> in general.  We must be clear that the purpose of <relateditem> is to permit relationships between *bibliographic items*, not *works*.  

In the following example --

<relateditem xml:id="chanson01" rel="constituent">
  <!-- Title of the *chanson* -->
  <titlestmt>
    <title>Qui souhaitez</title>
    <!-- Composer -->
    <respstmt>
      <persname authority="lcnaf">
        <choice>
          <orig>Certon</orig>
          <reg><rend>Certon, Pierre, d. 1572</rend></reg>
        </choice>
      </persname>
    </respstmt>
  </titlestmt>
  <!-- Relateditem can also be used to point to other formats of this, e.g., the text/poetry and/or a Sibelius transcription located on the web -->
  <relateditem rel="otherFormat" n="Text">
    <extref xlink:href="pointer.to.text"/>
  </relateditem>
  <relateditem rel="otherFormat" n="Sibelius">
    <extref xlink:href="pointer.to.SibeliusFile"/>
  </relateditem>
</relateditem>

the top-level <relateditem> is used to enumerate the individual chansons within a composite work, hence rel="constituent".  The nested <relateditem> elements are pointing to *the same intellectual content* in a different *physical form*.  This is fine and dandy.

We begin to get into trouble, however, when <relateditem> is used to relate musical works. I think I didn't read your message carefully enough. Sorry :(

Currently, work-to-work relationships can be described in a couple of places.  One method is to use titlestmt/title type="uniform"; the other is to use profiledesc/creation or /classification.  The first is the traditional librarian-ish method, which is not generally known to or used by non-librarians.

The second is not exactly intuitive either. (<profiledesc> is the container for work-related info., but you'd never know it from the name. It's a lousy name, but it has historical precedent.)

Allowing <relateditem rel="otherVersion"> in <source> and <filedesc> I fear will only encourage users to (mis|ab)use it.

Perhaps what we need is a <relatedwork> element in <profiledesc>.  (And maybe even a name change from <profiledesc> to <workdesc>!)  But, before doing anything I'd like to hear how the current methods don't address your needs and I'd like to investigate work-to-work relationship approaches that others have used.  Of course, I'd like to hear comments from everyone else on the list, too!

Sorry for the back-pedalling,

--
p.

__________________________
Perry Roland
Music Library
University of Virginia
P. O. Box 400175
Charlottesville, VA 22904
434-982-2702 (w)
pdr4h (at) virginia (dot) edu
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 14433 bytes
Desc: image001.jpg
URL: <http://lists.uni-paderborn.de/pipermail/mei-l/attachments/20110105/842025ed/attachment.jpg>