Bernhard Eversberg wrote:
snip
About any particular book, there can be many statements out in the
open world of the Web. Provided there is a stable, reliable, unique,
universally used identifier, going with every suchj statement, you're
very nearly there. The ISBN and ISSN are not quite that
Weinheimer Jim wrote:
I have a feeling that when they say work they mean something more like (in FRBR-speak)
expression since I doubt there is much use in the world for a unique number for the
entirety of Homer's Odyssey (except strictly for librarians) and they are thinking of specific
The ISBN has succeeded because it serves an extremely useful purpose in the
book trade. Similarly, the DOI has experienced a modicum of success as a
persistent identifier of scholarly articles, etc., because the major players
have determined that the benefit justifies the cost, providing a
In today's record, we would code this somewhat like:
100 $a Kurosawa, Akira $e director
245 $a Shichinin no samurai
246 $a Seven Samurai
500 $a Adapted as The Magnificent 7
730 $a Magnificent 7
Well I would change your 100 to a 700 to make this more like what we do in
a bibliographic record.
Library and Archives Canada, the host of the RDA-L list, is scheduling
maintenance on its systems on the weekend of March 6, 7, 2010. RDA-L will be
unavailable for the duration.
More information can be found at:
http://www.collectionscanada.gc.ca/whats-new/013-442-e.html
Major Interruption of
The web statements would presumably be derived from a large set of
records, not from an individual record. The bib record for Sturges'
Magnificent 7 if constructed the same way as the Kurosawa record would
inferentially provide the data needed to create the statement
establishing his
Quoting Stephen Hearn s-h...@umn.edu:
The web statements would presumably be derived from a large set of
records, not from an individual record. The bib record for Sturges'
Magnificent 7 if constructed the same way as the Kurosawa record
would inferentially provide the data needed to create the
Quoting Benjamin A Abrahamse babra...@mit.edu:
This is perhaps only tangentially RDA-related.
...
But if it was possible to convert MARC data into RDF-like
statements, we could move away from what I see as a lot of the
unnecessary work of thinking about and comparing *records*
Ben Abrahamse wrote:
For example, a library could decide to accept or ignore what MIT has to
say
about this particular work; or what MIT has to say about access points; or
what MIT has to say at all, and their catalog could be configured to
ignore
or accept that particular statement if it
Karen Coyle said:
It is a 3-part data construct. The full description of a book will be
made up of many statements. The big difference between what we do
today and the recordless view is that each of these statements is
able to be used independently of the context in which it was created.
Quoting J. McRee Elrod m...@slc.bc.ca:
Perhaps in your writing you should make in clearer that (1) we are not
there yet, and that (2) individual cataloguing agencies will not be
replacing national catalogue agency records with upstream data.
OCLC is already taking in publisher data, as is
11 matches
Mail list logo
