In message <[log in to unmask]>, CS
Hardman <[log in to unmask]> writes
>Dear Richard,
>
>Many thanks for your email. Yes indeed - the ADS provides a digital
>preservation service which is why we are making this offer and think it
>is worth while. The files delivered online may not be the ones that we
>retain in deep storage. Our ingest procedures including formats and
>documentation are described at:
>http://ads.ahds.ac.uk/project/policy.html
Catherine,
I am glad to see that ASCII and RTF are "preferred" for textual
resources over the binary word-processor formats you mentioned in your
announcement. However, I do hope that your list of preferred and
acceptable formats is out of date, and doesn't reflect current practice.
I am very surprised to see that XML isn't even down as an "acceptable"
format - shouldn't it be your preferred option these days (e.g. TEI XML
would be a very smart choice to promote)? This despite the fact the
SGML _is_ there - along with ODA, for heaven's sake. (Could FISH offer
a small prize for anyone who remembers what "ODA" stands for?)
Richard
--
Richard Light
SGML/XML and Museum Information Consultancy
[log in to unmask]
|