Dear Christian-Emil, Thanks for your reply. I will check back on this, but as far as I understood, the manuscripts in a codex have been purposely bound together. There can exist several codices with the same arrangement of manuscripts.
I think in this context we could see the manuscripts a result of an industrial production. They are manual copies, hence are not unique in the way that I understand a F4 Manifestation Singleton to be unique (both intellectually and physically) Best wishes, Florian > On 26. Oct 2017, at 19:29, Christian-Emil Smith Ore <[email protected]> > wrote: > > A small question about a codex containing several manuscripts: Is there any > relationship between the manuscripts (that is, the text they carry) or is it > simply a handy way to handle several manuscripts? The latter is the case for > some Nordic Medieval codices where the codix is simply a batch of non related > texts. > > In the recent CRM SIG meeting it was a long dicussion if a manuscript could > be seen as a result of a (production) plan and thus should be an item of an > F3 Manifestation Product Type. If so what is the Manifestation Singleton > realising the original expression of the codex manuscript. Would you claim > that the codices are a result of an idustrial production, mutatis mutandis? > > Best, > Christian-Emil > From: Crm-sig <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> on behalf of Florian Kräutli > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > Sent: 26 October 2017 15:27 > To: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > Subject: [Crm-sig] Modelling bound manuscript copies > > Dear all, > > We're working on a CIDOC-CRM/FRBRoo model to represent a collection of > Islamic manuscripts > > It is organised into Codices. Further we have the concepts of Witness and > Text. A Witness is a manuscript – a hand produced copy – of a Text. A Codex > contains several Witnesses bound together. > > A Codex can exist several times, similar to a copy of a book, and appear in > catalogues of other collections. However, the copies of the Codices are > hand-made, binding together several Witnesses. > > Our difficulty when modelling this comes due to the definition of F5 Item and > F4 Manifestation Singleton in FRBRoo. It would make sense to model our copy > of a Codex as an F5 Item, being an example of F3 Manifestation Product Type. > However, the scope note of F5 states that it is an object produced through an > industrial process, e.g. printing. The physical texts that are bound together > in a codex are however manual transcriptions. The definition of F4 > Manifestation Singletons for the Witnesses is however also not appropriate, > as we know several transcriptions of the same text exist. F5 Item would be > more appropriate for our Witnesses, but does it apply in our case? > > Another difficulty is when modelling the Codex as a binding together of > physical manuscripts and the texts they hold. Our direction is to model a > Codex as F15 Complex Work, that is realised in a F24 Publication Expression > carried by an E84 Information Carrier. The Texts are then F14 Individual Work > (as members of F15) realised in F22 Self-Contained Expression (as components > of F24). The Witnesses are E84 Information Carriers that carry said F22 and > P48 compose the E84 Information Carrier that carries the F24. We did not use > F4 or F5 here. Does this make sense? (See sketch: > https://oc.rz-berlin.mpg.de/owncloud/index.php/s/AXJLkRmv0E00ecM > <https://oc.rz-berlin.mpg.de/owncloud/index.php/s/AXJLkRmv0E00ecM>) > > Best wishes, > > Florian
