Difference between revisions of "Template:Classic RAD (1)"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(New page: Main Page > BCAUL pilot project > Templates > Classic RAD (1) '''Document status:''' in progress This version of the RAD template follows RAD's ''areas of description'' close...) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[Main Page]] > [[BCAUL pilot project]] > [[Templates]] > Classic RAD (1) | [[Main Page]] > [[BCAUL pilot project]] > [[Templates]] > Classic RAD (1) | ||
| + | |||
'''Document status:''' in progress | '''Document status:''' in progress | ||
| Line 8: | Line 9: | ||
*'''Disadvantage''': requires much back-end customization to implement fields that are little-used even in RAD environments. | *'''Disadvantage''': requires much back-end customization to implement fields that are little-used even in RAD environments. | ||
| + | |||
== Structure == | == Structure == | ||
Revision as of 16:28, 27 August 2008
Please note that ICA-AtoM is no longer actively supported by Artefactual Systems.
Visit https://www.accesstomemory.org for information about AtoM, the currently supported version.
Main Page > BCAUL pilot project > Templates > Classic RAD (1)
Document status: in progress
This version of the RAD template follows RAD's areas of description closely. It differs from Classic RAD (2) in the way it handles RAD elements that have no direct ISAD(G) or Qubit analog by creating custom fields (records in the Qubit property table).
- Advantage: descriptions are more fully RAD-compliant, data is more easily segregated into RAD elements with little loss of RAD specificity.
- Disadvantage: requires much back-end customization to implement fields that are little-used even in RAD environments.