[Metadatalibrarians] collection of reproductions--doubled records?

[Kristin E. Martin]

Hello Karen,

If you are digitizing the theses, are the print versions already 
cataloged and have records?  If that's the case, an easy solution would 
be to place a link to the catalog record in a relation field, like 
IsFormatOf.  That way you won't have to repeat information in the 
digital record, but users will be able to quickly access the information 
about the print version.  This would also save you some headache later 
if information about the print version changed (let's say you 
transferred all of your theses to a new location or changed the access 
conditions) because you would only need to update it in the catalog record.

If you don't have catalog records for the print, I would ask: do you 
want to have a complete descriptive record for the print?  If so, you 
probably want to create a separate record.  Otherwise (and perhaps this 
is not quite proper Dublin Core usage?) you could try to put all of the 
information about the print in the relation field.

The field could look something like: "Doe, John. My thesis (print 
version--Available for in-house use at Williams College College, call 
number: TH Doe)"

Kristin

Kristin E. Martin
Metadata Librarian
Catalog Department (MC 234)
2-390 Richard J. Daley Library
University of Illinois at Chicago
801 S. Morgan
Chicago, IL  60607
312-413-5052
312-413-0424 (Fax)
kmarti at uic.edu



Karen Benko wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I think (hope) I am making something more complicated than it really 
> is, and I would appreciate being set straight if that is the case.
>
> We are at the beginning of building, in ContentDM, a collection of 
> digitized undergraduate theses. Most of them are 20-100 pages of text; 
> a few are scores, DVDs, sound recordings, models, etc. The students 
> are required to submit their work in electronic and physical form and 
> the physical version of each thesis will be considered the main one 
> and the "original." There is some information about the original, such 
> as format, access conditions, and where it is housed, that we would 
> like to include in ContentDM. My reading of the Dublin Core one-to-one 
> principle is that in order to include this information about the 
> originals in ContentDM, we would have to have two records for each 
> thesis--one for the original and one for the digitized version. The 
> original would have Has Format [digitized version] and the digitized 
> version would have Is Format Of [original].
>
> Does anyone have a collection of reproductions where they are doing 
> this? Or better yet, does anyone have a collection of reproductions 
> where they are *not* doing this, but have found ways to include 
> information about the original in the record for the reproduction, 
> without making ContentDM or their head explode?
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Karen
>