[XML4Lib] 'Extending' MODS?

Rebecca S. Guenther rgue at loc.gov
Mon Jan 8 15:52:42 EST 2007


On Mon, 8 Jan 2007, Walker, David wrote:

> Hi All,
>  I'm working on a custom metasearch system.  When users of the system
> elect to save a record, I convert it from MARC-XML to MODS using a
> slightly modified version of the LOC XSLT style sheet.

>  I have two pieces of data that don't get picked-up by the LOC XSLT
> that I'd like to map into MODS, and was looking for a little advice:
>  
>  (1) FORMAT.  In this case, I'm extracting several values from the
> MARC record, including the 513, 072, leader, or even just based on
> which database the record came from, and running all of that through a
> little algorithm.  I end-up with values like 'Article', 'Book',
> 'Dissertation', 'Book Review', etc.

>  I think this value should probably go in the 'genre' element, maybe
> with the authority attribute set to 'local'.  Sound right?

Yes, this is definitely what MODS would call genre. There are various
genre lists that could be used, filling in the authority attribute as
appropriate.  You could use an already established one (the MARC genre
list has "book" and "review", not "article" and "dissertation", although
maybe these should be added), set up your own list and we can supply an
authority identifier, or just use "local".
MARC genre list is at:
http://www.loc.gov/marc/sourcecode/genre/genrelist.html

> (2) PEER REVIEWED.  In this case, I'm querying an external data source
> to determine if, in the event the item is an article, whether it comes
> from a peer-reviewed journal.
>  Some databases include this information in the 514 field (Data
> Quality Note), and the LOC XSLT maps the 514 to a generic 'note'
> element.  I need something more refined to distinguish this value from
> other note fields.  Is there any existing attributes or values that
> might help me here?

The note element has an uncontrolled type element (by the schema that
is). You can use a type and we could add to the list of types that we have
compiled at:
http://www.loc.gov/standards/mods/mods-notes.html
I would think that "peer review" or something like that as a note type
might be useful to others as well.

>  I realize that, since this is all local to my system, I could just
> make it up as I go.  But thought keeping the records close to the
> actual MODS standard, while extending it a little for my purposes,
> would be desirable.

This isn't really extending the MODS schema as such. It is established to
allow for this sort of extensibility, i.e. use of specific controlled
vocabularies for communities of users.

Rebecca
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
^^  Rebecca S. Guenther                                   ^^
^^  Senior Networking and Standards Specialist            ^^
^^  Network Development and MARC Standards Office         ^^
^^  1st and Independence Ave. SE                          ^^
^^  Library of Congress                                   ^^
^^  Washington, DC 20540-4402                             ^^
^^  (202) 707-5092 (voice)    (202) 707-0115 (FAX)        ^^
^^  rgue at loc.gov                                          ^^
^^                                                        ^^
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

> Thanks!
>  
> --Dave
>  
>  
>  
> -------------------
> David Walker
> Library Web Services Manager
> California State University
> http://xerxes.calstate.edu
> _______________________________________________
> XML4Lib mailing list
> XML4Lib at webjunction.org
> http://lists.webjunction.org/mailman/listinfo/xml4lib
> 




More information about the XML4Lib mailing list