On Wed, 2 Jul 1997, Paul Miller wrote:
>We add the ADS are currently most interested in your first option, where
>all of the values are given in a single string. We would only split them
>if the values were drawn from more than one SCHEME or TYPE, as each use
>of
>an element is only allowed ONE SCHEME and/or TYPE.
I wasn't following this thread too closely until I realized it affected
other elements besides "coverage." The "Hull, Yorkshire, England, etc."
example is somewhat comparable to a resource with multiple controlled-
vocabulary subject headings.
Keywords are generally strung together in one meta tag, as Paul Miller
suggests doing with geographic values, but in the couple examples I've
seen using Library of Congress subject headings (LCSH) as the scheme, each
subject heading has had its own meta tag, e.g.
<META NAME="DC.subject" SCHEME="LCSH" CONTENT="xxx">
<META NAME="DC.subject" SCHEME="LCSH" CONTENT="yyy">
<META NAME="DC.subject" SCHEME="LCSH" CONTENT="zzz">
I was about to implement something like the example above because that
seemed to be what was out there already. But if geographic values will be
strung together, as long as they're from the same scheme, then it seems
that all LCSH values should also be strung together (the approach I'd
prefer, actually).
I haven't yet seen a conclusive answer in the discussion of the
"coverage" element -- is there anything in DC, as it currently stands,
that dictates that one format is "right," or at least that one is
preferred over the other?
Diane Madrigal
New York State Library
State Education Department
Albany, NY
|