I haven't had a chance to look closely at the document yet, but it does disturb 
me that "a team from Zephira" appears to have, having thought about it for a 
few months, swept away nearly two decades of consideration by the best minds in 
the cataloging profession by apparently abandoning the FRBR model, as Mac 
points out below. I realize not everyone agrees with the FRBR model but I 
should think such a step should not happen simply because of a report from a 
consulting group. Sally McCallum said in her announcement that "like MARC, [the 
model] must be able to accommodate any number of content models", which is 
certainly true, but one would think that at least one of those content models 
might be RDA, which was the entire impetus for hiring Zephira to come up with a 
new model for us. Since RDA is firmly based on FRBR and DOES include provisions 
for describing and linking to expressions, it does seem inappropriate that the 
new model should not provide for this entity. I have a hard time seeing how 
this model would be any better a fit for RDA than the current MARC model.

Further, report's apparent continuation of a model that continues the division 
of the database into "authority" and "instance" (which I gather is more or less 
the equivalent of bibliographic records, see p. 10 of the report) seems 
extremely backward to me. In an ER linked data database we would have 
descriptions of the entities linked by relationship links.

Bob

Robert L. Maxwell
Special Collections and Ancient Languages Catalog Librarian
Genre/Form Authorities Librarian
6728 Harold B. Lee Library
Brigham Young University
Provo, UT 84602
(801)422-5568 

"We should set an example for all the world, rather than confine ourselves to 
the course which has been heretofore pursued"--Eliza R. Snow, 1842.

-----Original Message-----
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access 
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of J. McRee Elrod
Sent: Friday, November 23, 2012 3:41 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] BIBFRAME model document announced

Posted to Bibframe:


>http://www.loc.gov/marc/transition/pdf/marcld-report-11-21-2012.pdf


 Creative Work - a resource reflecting a conceptual essence of the 
cataloging item.


 Instance - a resource reflecting an individual, material embodiment 
of the Work.


 Authority - a resource reflecting key authority concepts that have 
defined relationships reflected in the Work and Instance. Examples of 
Authority Resources include People, Places, Topics, Organizations, etc.


 Annotation - a resource that decorates other BIBFRAME resources with 
additional information. Examples of such annotations include Library 
Holdings information, cover art and reviews.

Are we to gather that RDA's "Work" is still a work, but that "Instance"
replaces Manifestation, Expression is no more, and Item data is a part
of annotation?  Will WIAA or CIAA be our new acronym, replacing WEMI?


   __       __   J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (m...@slc.bc.ca)
  {__  |   /     Special Libraries Cataloguing   HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
  ___} |__ \__________________________________________________________

Reply via email to