- From: Ronald E. Daniel <rdaniel@acl.lanl.gov>
- Date: Tue, 3 Jan 1995 08:43:04 -0700
- To: hoymand@gate.net
- Cc: uri@bunyip.com
Dirk Herr-Hoyman sez: ... > what do you think about using an existing SGML DTD, the TEI header, > that has addressed the bibliographic encoded issues from a library > catalogers point of view. Sounds OK to me so far - in fact, the date and time stuff in my sketch of a URC DTD are taken straight from the TEI stuff. My concern about using the TEI DTD for URCs is complexity. If memory serves, TEI has 3 levels of bibliographic description - one to describe standalone works, one for works in a collection, and one for describing collections. I am not so sure that we want to carry this mindset on to electronic works. I will take a more detailed look through the TEI stuff and see what we might be able to do for a simple, useful, compatible subset. Ron
Received on Tuesday, 3 January 1995 10:43:11 UTC