I protest. David Bearman can say that he THINKS Alex is right, but he
cannot say Alex is right. Why? Because there is no commonly understood
(much less agreed upon) interpretation of 1:1 and it's implications for
Dublin Core implementors. That is the purpose of establishing the 1:1
working group. As a member of that newly established working group, I can
assure you the group has asserted no such thing.
In my library we interpret DC.Creator as Allison does, and assert that
Karen Coyle is NOT in fact primarily responsible for the intellectual
content of this object.
p
t 11:01 AM 1/28/99 -0500, you wrote:
>Dear Allison,
>In this case Alex is right. Ansel Adams did not create a jpeg. Karen Coyle
>created this one. Each DC metadata set (consisting of 15 repeatable
>elements) references _one_ information resource. This jpeg is _one_
>information resource. There may be MANY other digital files created and
>many other negatives, prints etc. Prints made by Ansel Adams from his
>negative a different from prints made by you from his negative.
>David
>
>At 09:42 AM 1/28/99 -0600, Smith, Allison wrote:
>>Alex, although I am very new to the list, and in using Dublin Core
>>(actually, I'm not yet, but just looking into it's potential for this
>>project that I'm working on), I have to disagree with you in regards to the
>>following way of using the Dublin Core "Creator" and "Contributor" elements
>>for describing the "creator" of a scan or metadata about an original
>>piece.........This is what you said:
>>
>> IMHO, the scanned image would be part of Karen's collection (or the
>>Library's
>> collection), with metadata allocated something like the following:
>>
>> DC.Name = "Image of Mt. Whatsitsname"
>> DC.Creator = "Coyle, Karen"
>> DC.Contributor = "California Digital Library"
>> DC.Contributor = "Adams, Ansel"
>> DC.Subject = "Mountain, Mt. Whatsitsname, Landscape, Sunset"
>> DC.Format = "image"
>> DC.Type = "image/jpeg"
>> DC.Relation = "(IsFormatOf) Photo of Mt. Whatsitsname - Adams,
>>Ansel"
>>
>>If we can agree with the DC definition of "Creator" - that it refers to the
>>person(s) primarily responsible for (the artistic or) intellectual content
>>of the item (i.e. the original photo), it would always be Ansel Adams, and
>>never Karen Coyle. IMHO, Karen Coyle played a contributing role in making
>>the photo accessible through scanning the image, creating the metadata, and
>>putting it on the web, but we should not confuse her with being the creator.
>>
>>
>>Think about it this way - in the artworld, many times an artist/printmaker
>>will have an apprentice. This person, under the direction of the artist,
>>may perform all the grunt work involved in making the print EXCEPT for
>>actually creating the image, choosing colors, paper, etc. This apprentice
>>would never be listed as the creator of the print, since he/she was not
>>responsible for the artistic content of the image itself. Instead, we would
>>list this person as a contributor. So, why would we ever want to list
>>"creators" of metadata/scans/etc. of original pieces, as the "creators"?
>>This is how I would propose writing the metadata:
>>
>> DC.Name = "Image of Mt. Whatsitsname"
>> DC.Creator = "Adams, Ansel"
>> DC.Contributor = "California Digital Library. Karen Coyle."
>> DC.Subject = "Mountain, Mt. Whatsitsname, Landscape, Sunset"
>> DC.Format = "image"
>> DC.Type = "image/jpeg"
>> DC.Relation = "(IsFormatOf) Photo of Mt. Whatsitsname - Adams,
>>Ansel"
>>
>>Would this work? Any comments?
>>
>>
>>************************************************************
>>Allison A. Smith
>>Retrospective Conversion Coordinator
>>Chicago Historical Society
>>312 642-5035 ext. 398
>>[log in to unmask]
>>Check out the Chicago Historical Society's website:
>>http://www.chicagohistory.org
>>************************************************************
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Alex Satrapa [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
>>> Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 1999 12:48 AM
>>> To: Karen Coyle
>>> Cc: Dublin Core community-wide list; CIMI Dublin Core Test Bed
>>> Subject: Re: Metadata for copies of Ansel Adams' photos of mountains
>>> [was Re: Bearman paper... Relations]
>>>
>>> Karen Coyle wrote:
>>>
>>> > I feel like we're talking at cross purposes, so let me reduce this to
>>> > basics. Photo of mountain by Ansel Adams has been digitized by Karen
>>> Coyle
>>> > for California Digital Library.
>>> >
>>> > 1) Can I create metadata under 1:1 that gives the creator as Ansel
>>> Adams?
>>> > If I do and I also desire to include information about how it came to be
>>> > digitized, what field does Karen Coyle go into?
>>>
>>> IMHO, the photo (or even the negative it was generated from) are stored
>>> somewhere, like Ansel Adams' personal collection/estate. The owner of this
>>> collection would contribute the metadata for the original photo. Something
>>> like (pardon my ignorance):
>>>
>>> DC.Name = "Photo of Mt. Whatsitsname"
>>> DC.Creator = "Adams, Ansel"
>>> DC.Subject = "Mountain, Mt. Whatsitsname, Landscape, Sunset"
>>> DC.Format = "image"
>>> DC.Type = "Kodak Photopaper XYZ, 28cm by 18cm"
>>>
>>> > 2) Can I create metadata under 1:1 that gives the creator as Karen
>>> Coyle?
>>> > If I do and I also desire to include the creator of the photograph for
>>> > purposes of discovery, what field does Ansel Adams go into?
>>>
>>> IMHO, the scanned image would be part of Karen's collection (or the
>>> Library's
>>> collection), with metadata allocated something like the following:
>>>
>>> DC.Name = "Image of Mt. Whatsitsname"
>>> DC.Creator = "Coyle, Karen"
>>> DC.Contributor = "California Digital Library"
>>> DC.Contributor = "Adams, Ansel"
>>> DC.Subject = "Mountain, Mt. Whatsitsname, Landscape, Sunset"
>>> DC.Format = "image"
>>> DC.Type = "image/jpeg"
>>> DC.Relation = "(IsFormatOf) Photo of Mt. Whatsitsname - Adams, Ansel"
>>>
>>> IMHO, the subjects of both resources are the same. If someone's actually
>>> looking for pictures by Ansel Adams by selecting DC.Creator = "Ansel,
>>> Adams",
>>> they'll get the first one. If they decide to look for copies of that photo
>>> that they can look at right now, they might click a button on the search
>>> interface labelled "Find Related", which automates the search for
>>> "DC.Relation <contains> Photo of Mt. Whatsitsname - Adams, Ansel". If
>>> they're
>>> just looking for images in some format of Mt. Whatsitsname, or just
>>> generic
>>> sunset landscapes, they'll get both records.
>>>
>>> Which brings up the interesting issue of ... how do we apply unique names
>>> to
>>> resources? But that's a different topic.
>>>
>>> I list Ansel as a contributor to the scanned image, because the scanned
>>> image
>>> wouldn't have been possible without his (significant) contribution.
>>>
>>> The rest of the DC Metadata set (Location, Rights, et al) refer
>>> specifically
>>> to the scanned image of the photo. At this point in time, in my role as
>>> cataloguer, I'll not write up the extra two Metadata records for the
>>> negative
>>> and the physical object, since they're not resources under my control.
>>> IMHO,
>>> the physical object is under the "control" of the Government surveyor. If
>>> the
>>> Government surveyor had a metadata set describing this significant peak,
>>> then
>>> the "owner" of the negative would prepare a metadata set for the negative,
>>> including the physical object as a relation. I (in my role as "owner" of
>>> the
>>> photo) would include a link to the negative. Then the chain of links would
>>> be
>>> complete.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Alex
>>>
>>> --
>>> Alex Satrapa
>>> tSA Consulting Group Pty Ltd.
>>> Canberra, Australia
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>David Bearman
>President
>Archives & Museum Informatics
>2008 Murray Ave, Suite D
>Pittsburgh, PA 15217 USA
>Phone: +1 412 422 8530
>Fax: +1 412 422 8594
>[log in to unmask]
>http://www.archimuse.com
>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|