[MEI-L] history of sources / items

[Roland, Perry D. (pdr4h)]

Hi Axel,

You're right -- it's not that <history> was actively dropped, it was never included in the first place.  I'm not averse to adding it, but I'd like to hear a good argument for doing it first.  Can you give me an example of what's not possible now that adding <history> would fix?

Perhaps it was a bad choice of name, but <physLoc> wasn't intended to be a summary of all the physical locations that an item has/had during its lifespan.  That's what <provenance> is for.  <physLoc> is only for an item's *current* location; that is, its holding institution and shelf mark.  I think it's important to separate the two (as they frequently are in library practice).  And, as you observe, munging them together now would cause compatibility problems.  So, I don't see a good reason to open that can of worms.

--
p.

__________________________
Perry Roland
Music Library
University of Virginia
P. O. Box 400175
Charlottesville, VA 22904
434-982-2702 (w)
pdr4h (at) virginia (dot) edu
________________________________________
From: mei-l [mei-l-bounces at lists.uni-paderborn.de] on behalf of Axel Teich Geertinger [atge at kb.dk]
Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2014 6:01 AM
To: Music Encoding Initiative
Subject: Re: [MEI-L] history of sources / items

Hi Johannes/Kristina/Joachim

As far as I remember <history> was not actively dropped from source and item, it just never has been implemented.  Introducing it could be a good idea indeed.
In that context I would like to call to mind the question about the <provenance> element again, now placed in <physDesc>. It has been suggested moving it to <physLoc>, but placing it in a history element seems even better to me.
But yes, that would break backward compatibility :-(

Best wishes,
Axel

Den 02/04/2014 kl. 11.39 skrev "Johannes Kepper" <kepper at edirom.de>:

> Dear list,
>
> while discussing the upcoming Weber Werkverzeichnis (Weber's work catalogue) with Kristina Richts and Joachim Veit, I can't remember why we dropped the <history> element from sources and items? We have it on works and expressions, but not on these two. However, it might be interested to write something about the creation of a source (which is not the same as the provenance, which is available). Can someone please remind me of our argument to drop it? Otherwise, it would be a fault that we might want to correct…
>
> Btw., <bibl> seems to be equally hidden (you can get it from source at source/physDesc/physMedium/bibl…).
>
> Best,
> Johannes
> _______________________________________________
> mei-l mailing list
> mei-l at lists.uni-paderborn.de
> https://lists.uni-paderborn.de/mailman/listinfo/mei-l

_______________________________________________
mei-l mailing list
mei-l at lists.uni-paderborn.de
https://lists.uni-paderborn.de/mailman/listinfo/mei-l