Yesterday I said:
-There was a suggestion that perhaps the US and state files could be treated as two recGrps of a single file, but that won't work because they each have to have their own locMaps. locMap is non-repeatable and at the same level as fileTxt (which contains the recgrp element). Therefore, each file type needs its own complete .
Ok, that was wrong - forgot that you could have one locmap, one set of dataItems and then multiple physLoc elements differentiated by references to the recgrp they belong to.
However, I still don't want to try to combine them for the following reasons:
1. fileTxt really looks for a particular file. Since the CBP files are (at least since 1986) consistent in releasing separate files for each geo level (and each state for the county files), I'd be mis-using the element in order to to assign the US and state files as record groups w/in a single fileTxt element.
2. It would be more complicated than three separate codebooks for each type of file.
3. It's not clear to me why, if you put US and states together, you couldn't also add in counties.
4. I don't see what we'd gain by using the combination approach. These metadata files are small and if the access system is currently doing single year searches, then what diff. would 3 metadata files make over two?
Now, depending on the answers/responses to the above, I might well change my mind, but I'm going to ahead w/three sep. metadata files, one each for US, state and county file types.
Added the <notes> to fileTxt for each file type, but I'm not sure why - is this a reflection of something that should be coded in the metadata or is an aid to the access system? Also, *assume* that the gloss should be in <otherMat>, but not certain.
To do: ask about the issues above, run the metadata files through the proofing software tonight...