Perhaps I'm not the right person
to replay here as I'm more a MS transcriber and editor rather than a
cataloger, but my feeling is that a repository is quite a fundamental
element as the goal of the msIdentifier is to identify, indeed, a MS
and that can be done by providing a widely recognized special name
(msName) or by providing at least the repository if not the idno.
But, of course, this is just my thought and catalogers will be of other
Syd Bauman ha scritto:
[log in to unmask]"
The trouble is that <repository> is given without the '?'
quantifier thus making it mandatory if any other element from
sequence is present. This is confirmed by the validator: as long
as there's a <repository>, anything goes. I don't think this
omission of the '?' quantifier in ROMA is intentional, though.
Ah, I missed that one. This indeed looks like an oversight in ROMA.
No, I don't think so. My recollection is that the manuscript experts
on that task force believed that a repository was required. Any of
the other MSsers care to comment?
(It would actually be an easier content model to maintain if
repository were also optional, because then what is now a reference
to a model class followed by four references to specific elements
could become one reference to a specialized model class.)