At 01:13 AM 20/02/2007, Georg Vogeler wrote:
We do need something that comes from our understanding what charters are
("historical texts with at least one physical representation on
which its legal validity was based" - can anybody native speaking
help me with this definition? :-).
That would be a historical
"instrument," a document which gives formal expression to
a legal act.
And you see: all three models you cited aren't really interested
in the authenticity of a document. A scholar of diplomatics is
("discrimen veri ac falsi" ...).
amen...and I would add that such assessment is as
much based on the extrinsic and intrinsic elements of form of the record
and on its traditio or transmission as it is on its documentary
context (archival description, being a collective authentication of the
fonds and its internal relationships, provides the basis for that) and on
the trustworthiness both of the custodian of the original record and of
the person responsible for the digitization and for the maintenance of
the digitized material. This is why metadata should be
distinguished into two categories, according to the components of
authenticity: identity metadata and integrity metadata. The
former identify the original record, just like a regestum does, defines
its status of transmission, establishes its place in the original
aggregation of records, and names the legitimate custodian(s) overtime,
while the latter identify the characteristics of the digitized version in
terms both of digital presentation and of documentary manifestation
(keeping in mind that digitization gives the illusion to users of dealing
with a facsimile, but nothing could be further from it that a digitized
copy of an analogue record), the responsibility for digitization, the
date, the primary responsibility for maintenance of the digitized copies,
subsequent upgradings and migrations with dates and responsibilities (do
not forget that technological obsolescence is going to be increasingly
frequent), new presentations etc.
However, as others have mentioned, the encoding of the record itself is
separate from the encoding of its abstract and from the creation of the
metadata for the digitized version of record and abstract. It seems to me
that all three models mentioned earlier confuse those different
things. In addition, the terminology of TEI is not consistent with
any archival metadata schema which may be incorporated in any
recordkeeping system which will hold and retrieve the digitized
version. Consistency of terminology among those three components
(encoding of the record, encoding of the abstract and metadata) is
vital. However, indeed, the first thing to agree upon is what is
the record for which we wish to develop an encoding language. What
is a charter? Until today I spoke on the assumption that we were
all on the same page as it regards what a charter is, but now I am
getting this funny feeling that we are not. So, I will tell you
what I think we are working on, and then you tell me whether you really
referred to a much broader concept (including writs, deeds,
etc.)
Charter:
"An instrument emanating from the sovereign power, in the nature of
a grant, either to a whole nation, or to a class or portion of the
people, to a corporation (e.g. city, university), or to a colony or
dependency, assuring to them certain rights, liberties, or
powers." This is the definition I prefer because it embraces
both form and act and applies to charters through time.
Encyclopedia Britannica: "a document granting certain specified
rights, powers, privileges, or functions from the sovereign power of a
state to an individual, corporation, city, or other unit of local
organization. ...in medieval Europe, monarchs typically issued
charters to towns, cities, guilds, merchant associations,
universities, and religious institutions; such charters guaranteed
certain privileges and immunities for those organizations while also
sometimes specifying arrangements for the conduct of their internal
affairs. By the end of the European Middle Ages, monarchs granted
charters that guaranteed overseas trading companies monopolies of
trade (and in some cases government) within a specified foreign
geographic area. ...Modern charters are of two kinds, corporate
and municipal. A corporate charter is a grant made by a
governmental body giving a group of individuals the power to form a
corporation, or limited-liability company. A municipal charter is
a law passed by a government allowing the people of a specific locality
to organize themselves into a municipal corporationi.e., a city.
Such a charter in effect delegates powers to the people for the
purpose of local self-government."
Because the charter is a also a documentary form, it may be used to give
solemnity to an act that does not have the nature of a grant, such as the
Canadian Charter of Rights, which is established by the people as
represented in the legislature, but issued by the Queen.
Is this the entity we are talking about, or is it too limited a concept?
Luciana
Dr. Luciana Duranti
Chair and Professor, Archival Studies
Director, InterPARES Project
(
www.interpares.org)
School of Library, Archival and Information Studies
The University of British Columbia
Suite 301 - 6190 Agronomy Road
Vancouver, B.C.V6T 1Z3 Canada
Tel. 604/822-2587
FAX 604/822-6006
http://www.slais.ubc.ca/PEOPLE/faculty/faculty-bio/duranti-bio.htm
http://www.interpares.org/ld/