Jonathan
Thank you for your latest message. I am glad to know that I gave a correct
re-statement of your views, at least 'more or less!' I have found this
discussion very interesting and think it is very important to understand each
other's point of view if we are to carry the debate forwar
Philip's restatement is indeed pretty much a correct re-statement of
my views, more or less. Thanks to Philip for summing it up more
succinctly then I did.I'm not sure Karen and Diane agree
completely, but I think they agree in broad strokes. [In particular,
I myself am confused about exact
Jonathan said:
>ISBD is essentially an Encoding standard, assuming/definining a
>certain Schema.
I disagree. ISBD is essentially a selection of elements to be included
in a description, with the assumption display will be inclusive, and
in that order. The punctuation is secondary to this cent
Thanks to Jonathan and Mac for their weekend responses to my weekend message.
Having slept on the matter, I believe Jonathan's careful explanation of the key
paragraph in my e-mail has led me to a better understanding of the Framework
and the part of it which was a mystery to me before reads qu
Phillip David said in explaining (for more clearly that ever before)
what is meant by having components of a meta data schema:
>RDA should be purely a 'guidance' tool in order to operate well as
>part of a metadata system, and should not include schema or encoding
>specifications. If MARC is to
On Mar 16, 2007, at 8:16 PM, Philip Davis wrote:
It is helpful to have set down the sequence of stages in
bibliographic control as seen by the Dublin Core community, namely
Model, Schema, Guidance, Encoding. To mirror this, I should tend to
express the sequence as Statement of International Cata
Jonathan Rochkind said:
>I see the Model, Schema, Guidance and Encoding as _components_ of a
>metadata system.
The difficulty I see in dividing these components is that they may
become discordant. They must be in tandem. The contradictions
between AACR2 and MARC21 are cases in point, e.g., t
I have read through Framework for a Bibliographic Future carefully twice. I do
not understand all of it but shall present my response to it in the hope of
receiving further enlightenment. I am grateful to the authors for being 'not
ones to leave well enough alone' and believe that w
Mac, et al.:
John Larson said:
The really strong advantage of the distinction between data and display is
that you can hide information that users won't generally need. Thus, for
instance, you can hide the fact that in the controlled vocabulary,
"autobiographies" as a term may be an exempli
Diane I. Willmann said:
>The point I was trying to make was that there are other ways to
>identify concepts from vocabularies other than by typing in their
>text "labels"
And a very good point it is. MARC21 uses 650 vs. 655 to distinguish
between subject and genre (or in the case of your item
Mac,
As you said, "It's hard to say nicely that the emperor is naked."
Regards,
Jim Agenbroad ( [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED])
)
** AOL now offers free
email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at
http://ww
John Larson said:
>The really strong advantage of the distinction between data and display is
>that you can hide information that users won't generally need. Thus, for
>instance, you can hide the fact that in the controlled vocabulary,
>"autobiographies" as a term may be an exemplified attribut
On 3/13/07, J. McRee Elrod <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Why is its genre called a subject? It is, one assumes, an
>autobiography, not a book about autobiographies as the descriptive set
>says.
Certainly this item would be of no use to a patron seeking works about
autobiographies, the stated "S
I said of the sample descriptive set posted at:
http://futurelib.pbwiki.com/Framework
>Why is its genre called a subject? It is, one assumes, an
>autobiography, not a book about autobiographies as the descriptive set
>says.
Certainly this item would be of no use to a patron seeking works ab
Diane I. Hillmann posted this url:
http://futurelib.pbwiki.com/Framework
There is a sample descriptive set illustrating a complex set of data,
reflecting the FRBR entities.
It seems to me the mountain has laboured and brought forth a mouse.
The sample descriptive set would hardly serve in a
EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: [NGC4LIB] Framework for a Bibliographic Future
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
X-Original-IP: 129.74.250.229
X-PMX-Version: 4.7.1.128075, Antispam-Engine: 2.1.0.0, Antispam-Data:
2007.2.25.20934
X-PMX-Version: 5.3.1.294258, Antispam-Engine: 2.5.0.283055,
Antispam-Data: 2007.3.12.100934
16 matches
Mail list logo
