search

PerseusDL / canonical-latinLit

XML Canonical resources for Latin Literature
https://scaife.perseus.org
Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike 4.0 International
42 stars 56 forks source link

Two Seneca textgroups in Scaife-stoa0255_phi1017 #502

Open AlisonBabeu opened 2 years ago

AlisonBabeu commented 2 years ago

So as I work my way through the Scaife collection (skipping ahead here and there, if only I were at S), I noticed that we have two textgroups for Seneca the Younger in Scaife. I think this puzzling situation originated from how I cataloged the data originally, in the fact that the Dialogi of Seneca are given one ID by the PHI (phi1017.phi012) but are broken into ten component works by STOA (stoa0255.stoa004, 006-014). This was a problem as well when we created the "next generation" level of metadata few years ago and two expression records were created for each Dialogi (I'm still cleaning up and redirecting URNs for duplicate phi Dialogi!).

It looks kind of strange to have Seneca twice in the list, especially since the second textgroup reads Seneca, Lucius Annaeus (Plays), which while technically correct, is kind of offputting. I know CTS requires one top level canonical identifier per textgroup so I don't think there is away to get all of these works to list under one author without some CTS issues. Any thoughts @lcerrato , not looking for solutions as much as some discussion on this issue and maybe potential solutions for the Scaife viewer display.

lcerrato commented 2 years ago

@AlisonBabeu I presume that each Dialogue/Essay should have a unique URN, since they are usually cited by title.

It would be preferable to have one top level author ID and stick with that. I don't know enough about the catalog or SV software to know if a redirect is possible, but ideally the two sets of IDs should be cross linked, so that anyone looking for the stoa URNs is redirected to the phi URNs.

Or, perhaps there is a way to group these so that the table of contents is not weird? Since we don't know how that will end up, maybe it isn't a big deal. But I could see the reader missing part of Seneca the way it is now.

AlisonBabeu commented 2 years ago

hi @lcerrato yes each Dialogue does have its own URN which is why we went with Scaife. I think we decided to leave the plays that were already in Perseus under their PHI numbers the way they were because we didn't want to have create a whole bunch of new CTS-URNs for existing Perseus works that had a long history under other URNs. The catalog software made it possible for Bridget to associate more than one URN with an author, which we did after the first initial metadata release in 2013. I think I will open an issue on this in Scaife since ideally we just leave the URNs alone at this point, but don't have two Senenca the Younger textgroup headings. What do you think?

lcerrato commented 2 years ago

@AlisonBabeu I think that's a good idea, but I'm wondering if Jake won't prefer a cts metadata based solution. I'm thinking we could add something to the cts workgroup files that would trigger a single grouping? I think we don't want to be dependent on exceptions in the Scaife Viewer as that doesn't serve us moving forward.

AlisonBabeu commented 2 years ago

@lcerrato I'm not sure I will open an issue as my last thing today and then hopefully we can discuss it on Tuesday!