I am importing a collection of documents into Omeka. The collection has been catalogued twice before, so each item has two Identifiers that I need to import into the database. One ID is historical, the other one is the ID currently in use at the archive that hosts the hardcopies of the documents.
Since the historical ID is still widely used, e.g. for citations in scholarly texts, I need to preserve these old IDs. At the same time I need to use the new archive IDs as primary Identifier.
I know how to set two values for DublinCore:Identifier when creating an object. What I am missing is the possibility to futher characterize each ID, as would be possible in standard DC rdf notation, if I understand this right.
But while the Omeka backend makes it possible to insert more than one values for DublinCore:Identifier, it is not possible to set differenciating qualifiers for the two IDs. This leads to the IDs showing up in the Frontend with the two IDs as a list of Identifiers.
Is it possible to further characterize the two identifiers via the Omeka backend? And is it possible to make them show up as historical ID and archive ID also in the web frontend without having to code this directly in show.php?
Yes, putting qualifications on elements in Omeka is something that comes up from time to time, and there’s not really an easy way to do that.
The quickest/simplest solution I can think of is to use Item Type Metadata to differentiate the two. You’d decide which one you want to use as Dublin Core Identifier, and for the other you’d create another field within an Item Type, probably something like “Historical Identifier”.
With that Item Type and Element, you should be able to import and display the data separately. The display might be a little clunky, and call for minor modifications to show.php, because of the different headings for Dublin Core and Item Type metadata, but those are pretty well-known issues.
I have another solution I use often : i prefix the identifier, so I can use multiple unique dcterms:identifier: isbn:123456, local:abcd, doi:123/456/789, lib:950:54, etc.
The dcterms:identifier does not require a format, but “Recommended best practice is to identify the resource by means of a string conforming to a formal identification system.” So it depends on your choice. So it’s an arbitrary solution, but this is always the case.
You may use the filters of Omeka too to display the ids differently.
@Daniel_KM, and could you provide any reference listing such identifiers? Is there any? Some identifiers may have different variants, so I’m curious if there is something like recommended notation widely recognized.
Historicaly, any library, museum, archives services, etc have its own system and this is still a complex question. For the books, the isbn wins, but it doesn’t apply to old books; there are issn for serials, doi for articles, ark for archives, orcid, openid, idhal, or a lot of competitors to identify researchers. In my heritage projects, I prefer to use ark when I can, because it provides any number of free number easily. Anyway, most of the time there are multiple unique identifiers…