On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 6:39 PM, Jonathan Rochkind <[email protected]> wrote: > I agree with the principles you lay down in general, agree with your liking > of FRBR, and agree we should not neccesarily be bound by what libraries have > always done, especially when working in a domain where compatibiilty with > library legacy data is not important (up to OL whether OL is such a domain, > but it's reasonable to decide it is). > > But I don't think it's true that an association (or other collective body) > can not author a document.
Not to belabor this more, but libraries and library data don't use the term "author" (and "creator" is a figment of Dublin Core). The 100/110/111/700/710/711 are responsible entities. That point is made pretty explicitly by our 245$c "statement of responsibility", which generally mimics (or, more commonly, and regrettably, replaces) the personal/corporate/meeting name fields. -Ross. _______________________________________________ Ol-tech mailing list [email protected] http://mail.archive.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ol-tech To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send email to [email protected]
