-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 6
2015 05 14 Agenda
Nancy
- Jean-Philippe Moreux stepping down to "let Bertrand Caron step in if the Board accepts his application....we both think he's the right person to represent the BnF at the METS board." JPM will continue to work with along with Bertrand on METS 2.0
- Markus Enders: "As I am leaving the British Library and move on to non-library specific IT-adventures I think it is best to resign from the METS Board. I will start working at the University College London." (Congratulations)
METS 1.x change request from Bertrand Caron of BNF to add LABEL, ORDER, ORDERLABEL (of xsd:anyAttribute) to the area element to support 3D objects (specifically globes). May also want to add these to par and seq elements.
Background discussion last meeting:
- Jerry suggested parallel and sequential sub-elements --
- It was also suggested that they could use xsd:any in the element - that would be flexible and more easily transitioned to 2.0. *Tom will get back to Bertrand and suggest xsd:any and get his reaction. We will then go from there. If it will work for him, Tom will draft the change.
Tom to Bertrand 20150428: Apologies for the delayed response. The METS Board did discuss your change request at our last meeting and the consensus was to add xsd:anyAttribute to the element (and for completeness the and elements). This would allow you to extend those elements with any locally-defined attributes you needed. For example:
Let me know if this would be an acceptable solution to your request, and if so I can quickly make the changes to the XML schema for wider review.
Bertrand to Tom 20150513: Thank you for the answer. We suppose it is consistent with the changes introduced in the 1.10 version of the schema, and with the decision made to add extensibility to the attributes. However, we would have preferred to allow METS "official" attributes: we are currently switching from an in-house XML schema to METS to describe our digitized documents, for more genericity and interoperability. If we insert again new specific elements, it seems to us that a part of the benefit is lost. And we will have to continue to maintain another in-house schema...
Tom to Bertrand 20150513: In general the Board has been leaning toward adding extensibility points, such as anyAttribute, to the schema as opposed to new defined attributes. This is partially due to the perceived maturity of the METS standard. There is the feeling that most new change requests are for somewhat niche use cases which may not have broad applicability and therefore might be better server as extensions to METS as opposed to core attributes. The other reason we are hesitant to introduce new attributes or elements to the 1.x schema is due to the ongoing work to develop a “METS 2.0” schema based more around linked data concepts.
However, given your use case of 3-D digital objects which I don’t think has really been addressed before by METS, I am happy to revisit the discussion with the Board. I think there is a strong case to be made that having specific support along with guidelines for representing 3-D objects in METS would be a good thing for the broader community. I also think it would be great if there was a publish METS profile describing how to represent 3-D objects in METS.
I would be happy to hear from other Board members on the topic.
Nancy Hoebelheinrich, Andreas Nef, Jean-Philippe Moreux, and Bertrand Caron
(Message from Brian: https://wiki.duraspace.org/display/FF/Portland+Common+Data+Model )