Many thanks for clearing up the definition (again). I have no problem with that definition.
As I've seen some commits to github half a year ago, I thought that manual joining of Works could be ready by now but apparently I've misjudged the process. On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 01:05:08PM -0700, Karen Coyle wrote: > Ralf, the Work on OL tries to follow the FRBR definition of Work [1]. So > different years, even different translations, are the same work if the > text expresses the same content. Of course, making a bright line > distinction on Work is difficult, but some aspects of it are not > difficult. It is the same Work if the author and title are the same, or, > in the case of translations, if the author and original title are the same. > > I think of a Work as what we might discuss if you read Thomas Mann in > German and I read it in English, but we could talk about "Magic > Mountain" and what we thought of it even so. However, a movie made from > the book would be a different work (and as we know, movies that are > faithful to the text are rare if ever, although they use some of the > concepts from the book). It gets more complicated with movies and music, > but with books it's easier. > > kc > > [1] > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_Requirements_for_Bibliographic_Records _______________________________________________ Ol-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.archive.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ol-discuss To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send email to [email protected]
