 |
 |
Hi Stephen, I believe the UCSD folks have put things in a relational database in a spec-agnostic way (and then they can pull things out as MODS, MARC, or whatever on the fly when needed). There is a link below to their GitHub repository which has some documentation (and slides from a 2013 presentation they gave at that year's Code4Lib conference). https://github.com/ucsdlib/dams/tree/master/ontology Hope that helps, Kevin On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 1:27 PM, Stephen Schor <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Hullo. > > I'm interested to hear about people's approaches for modeling > repository objects in a normalized, spec-agnostic way, _relational_ way > while > maintaining the ability to cast objects as various specs (MODS, Dublin > Core). > > People often resort to storing an object as one specification (the text of > the MODS for example), > and then convert it other specs using XSLT or their favorite language, > using established > mappings / conversions. ( > http://www.loc.gov/standards/mods/mods-conversions.html) > > Baking a MODS representation into a database text field can introduce > problems with queryablity and remediation that I _feel_ would be hedged > by factoring out information from the XML document, and modeling it > in a relational DB. > > This is idea that's been knocking around in my head for a while. > I'd like to hear if people have gone down this road...and I'm especially > eager to hear both success and horror stories about what kind of results > they got. > > Stephen > -- "There are two kinds of people in this world: those who believe there are two kinds of people in this world and those who know better."