Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

  • A metadata provider may have stated a fact X in the past and now also wants to state Y. This can be handled by a MEAD message stating XY.
  • Another metadata provider may have stated XY in the past, but wants to “disown” Y now. This can be handled by a MEAD message stating just X (the absence of Y indicates that Y is no longer claimed.
  • This also works for the case where the metadata provider claimed, for example, three genres for a sound recording and now wants retract one of them. This can be handled by sending a MEAD message with the two remaining genres (and omitting the third).
  • A metadata provider may have, say, a genre X in the past and wants to state a genre Y instead.  This can be handled by a MEAD message stating just the genre of Y instead of X. 
  • A metadata provider may have communicated a genre in the past and now wants to disown all genre information. This can be handled by completely omitting the GenreCategory tag. 

The same approach can be used to completely disown any information previously communicated, in a MeadMessage, about a specific party or creation. In that case the metadata provider shall send a new MeadMessage with only a 

  • ResourceSummary composite in case that the subject of the MeadMessage is a Resource;
  • ReleaseSummary composite in case that the subject of the MeadMessage is a Release;
  • WorkSummary composite in case that the subject of the MeadMessage is a Work; or
  • PartySummary composite in case that the subject of the MeadMessage is a Party.

 

This approach has many advantages, which is why DDEX has adopted it across its messaging standards. However, in the context of MEAD – a standard through which multiple sources may provide data to a single recipient – it also has a few drawbacks:

...