> Dan Matei wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Jonathan Rochkind <rochk...@jhu.edu> > > To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA > > Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2009 17:31:32 -0400 > > Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Utility of FRBR/WEMI/RDA > > > >> Yes, it's an arbitrary judgement. They are ALL arbitrary judgements, > >> either way. > > > > I would prefer to call them cultural conventions. IMHO, they are not > completely arbitrary: they are based on the > > evaluation of the "amount of added creativity".
But I think this misses the point: does WEMI define the universe of information, *and* define what people want when they search information? From my understanding of FRBR/RDA, everything must be boiled down to WEMI. Certainly if I have a book by one author and they make a movie out of it, that may be one thing, but there are almost infinite possibilities today. What if I have a single document in XML that outputs MSWord, pdf, HTML, text, djvu and so on? Each output has different "page numbers" and can look completely differently, but they are all have exactly the same information. Many newspapers are produced this way so that they don't have to make separate paper versions and an online version. Even among these different versions, there may be specific outputs for a different screen sizes, for different browsers, or on a specific mobile phone (becoming more popular) and now probably with different ebook readers. Remember, these versions are derived from one, single file, and most of these versions are only "virtual" i.e. while they can be printed, they won't be. Add to this a mashup of bits and pieces of separate items of information from different websites using APIs, each of which may have gone through a similar transformation as mentioned above. It seems to me that trying to relate this to WEMI is literally mind-blowing and an exercise in futility. I see our task as trying to give access to this information in the most coherent way for our users. Is seeing everything through "WEMI-colored lenses" the only way, the best way, or even a correct way, of doing it? Jim Weinheimer
