[MEI-L] physLoc

[Axel Teich Geertinger]

Hi Perry,

to get back to the physLoc question: you wrote

does the provenance information pertain to only the copy in the first physical location or to both?  If it pertains to both, then the <provenance> elemement shouldn't be a child of the first <physLoc>, but should exist outside it.  Assuming <provenance> is permitted only within <physLoc>, if I want to say that both copies have always been kept together, then information will have to be repeated.  For example,

<source>
  <physDesc/>
  <physLoc>
    <provenance>Always together</provenance>
  </physLoc>
  <physLoc>
    <provenance>Always together</provenance>
  </physLoc>
</source>

I see that this would require information to be repeated. However, I think usually the situation would rather be that items in different physical locations (typically copies kept in different archives) would have different provenance. How would you describe that? You would have something like:

<source>
  <physDesc>
    <provenance>This relates to one location</provenance>
    <provenance>This relates to the other location</provenance>
  </physDesc>
  <physLoc>
    <repository>some archive</repository>
  </physLoc>
  <physLoc>
    <repository>some other archive</repository>
  </physLoc>
</source>

With <physLoc> and <provenance> separated, you would have to use IDREFs to clarify which provenance is related to which location (or item), right? Is that better than repeating information or using someting like @sameas in those (rare, I would say) cases, where several items in _different_ locations (or with different shelf marks) share the same provenance?

Have a nice weekend,
Axel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.uni-paderborn.de/pipermail/mei-l/attachments/20121208/c8690cba/attachment.html>