On 17.10.2010, Jenn Riley wrote:
The XML format that defines this data (our project "efrbr" definition; more information at<http://www.dlib.indiana.edu/projects/vfrbr/schemas/1.0/index.shtml>) doesn't have the concept of a "record," just "entities" and "relationships"...
While this is a fresh and thus laudable approach, can it really be regarded as cutting the gordian knot of entanglements we run into while trying to add FRBR functionality to record-based bibliographic systems? More generally, has anyone done anything large-scale with such data, and with Jenn's stuff in particular? B.Eversberg
