1.5. Subject Classifications [UNDER REVISION]

[davidamichelson]

@wlpotter Can you revise this one please?
1.5. Subject Classifications [UNDER REVISION]
SMBL reproduces the subject classifications used by Wright in his catalogue. A further description of this taxonomy will be added here.

[wlpotter]

We may want to discuss this. I don't think these are subject classifications. "Genre" is closer, which is why I used dcterms:type as the relation predicate -- though I'm not convinced that's exactly right, either, since for a manuscript that might refer more to its type (e.g., Physical Object or Manuscript) rather than to its contents.

So, on the one hand, I don't think we are doing subject classification. And, on the other, we need to decide what to call Wright's classifications and where in the documentation we want to put it

[wlpotter]

Possibly should be discussed as part of the Header section? (cf. #356 )

[wlpotter]

We will use this but note that we use Wright's genre terms rather than LCSH. To do here:

• Reference the tei:head section as the place where we record this info for each ms or part
• Add the list of taxonomy terms to this section
• Note that we only use the most specific (bible-nt rather than just bible)