Closed SJagodzinski closed 3 years ago
kerstarno
commented
3 years ago As a note:
EAC beta included an element <sex> that had a required @type with the values "m" (for male), "f" (for female), and "u" (for unknown). We probably would want to consider the name of the element and especially the values, if we wanted to stick with a predefined value list, but maybe this could be a starting point.
Possibly interesting to look at in this context:
SJagodzinski
commented
3 years ago EAC-CPF meeting 3 September 2021:
<legalStatuses>/<legalStatus> is actually the only specific element due to the entity type corporate body; all other elements are general element that fit to all entity types<localDescriptions>/<localDescription> was meant to enter further information like nationality, and gender, religious or ethnic affiliation<localDescriptions>.
Comments from the Archives and Records Association Section for Archives and Technology
Concerns: persons
Creator of issue
The issue relates to
Context
It struck me that corporate bodies and places had fared better than individuals in terms of attention to attributes, linked data etc. I may be missing something here, but I did think that the concept of identity and the individual (specifically gender and identity) had not been addressed as it could have been.