How do people feel about this approach?
Simplify the subfields by applying Ockham's Razor, or principle of
economy: (http://www.hensa.ac.uk/parallel/www/occam-bio.html)
"plurality should not be assumed without necessity"
[aka "Keep it simple, stupid"]
to the list of qualifiers for each element.
By this I mean, for each element and for each different use of a
qualifier for an element, there is a unique and recommended format
together with references to documents containing 'approved' or
recommended mappings / cross-walks to/from GILS, IAFA, EAD, MARC, ...
This would have the advantages of making the qualifiers list and the
standard smaller and encourage implementors to actually write code to
work with the qualifiers.
Where no mapping can be done or it isn't suitable to use the
recommended qualifier, the data from the richer metadata system can
be used.
Dave
|