On 21/09/2012 00:07, Kelley McGrath wrote:
snip
I sometimes wonder what the silent majority on lists thinks. There are
definitely people interested in trying to insert this kind of data into
existing records. Many moving image (and music) catalogers are very
interested in relator terms and
Good point James!
I did some training on MARC 21 for an adcemic institution in the South East of
England. When I was getting all lyrical about the potential of the notes fields
to contain the names of actors directors etc - I was politely informed that
they had discussed this with the
John
Thanks for this. In RDA a period of activity can also be a single date; we've
tended to use, for example 046 $s 18 for someone known to have become active in
the 19th century, but have not closed this with $t 18 unless certain that the
person also ceased to be active in the 19th
Hi, John and Richard:
Thanks for making it the case for using YY only to indicate century. As far as
I am concerned, there are several issues:
1. If it's markup, then somewhere we have to indicate the scheme chosen for
DateTime is extended ISO8601 or others; as the same field can use more
Richard and John:
Thank you so much for bringing up this topic timely. How do we justify an
Active status for a period of time of a person?
In the previous example calculating the interest of a person dynamically, a
weight was given based on intensity of an activity, e.g. activity type,
I did some training on MARC 21 for an adcemic institution in the South East
of England. When I was getting all lyrical about the potential of the notes
fields to contain the names of actors directors etc - I was politely informed
that they had discussed this with the academic staff involved
Keith and James:
With the adoption of RDA, I would hope that
IMDB data gets into the catalog for movie titles
and the way to cite them is to indicate the source,
e.g. imdb: as prefix of the field.
How much cataloging do we need to give
description for? Do we own the title,
have the
I believe my initial response to James' initial posting concerning consistency
may have started some controversy, which is not my intention. In response to
his post below, I must add, in my view, the patron usually isn't looking for
any exhaustive listing but only interested in a particular
Assuming relator terms or role indicators are immensely helpful, all the more
important they be consistently and inclusively applied throughout the catalog.
Is LC going to retrospectively add them, OCLC? At present it's 270 million
records without relator terms, how many with? Even if OCLC can
Mike:
I encountered similar situation for classical music collections in fall 2010
when I tested RDA for potable music records in Internet Archives, YouTube, etc.
What I did was to add library holdings into the subscription packages that
music teacher paid for her class instead of
Mike:
Please be positive. It'll be alright and much sooner than you stated.
Thanks!
Amanda Xu Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 21, 2012, at 10:50 AM, Mike Tribby mike.tri...@quality-books.com wrote:
Assuming relator terms or role indicators are immensely helpful, all the
more important they
Jack:
I called the particular instance as a signal, which I named it as the path to
discover, a.k.a. signaling pathways.
I did some initial design this summer using entity graphs from Microsoft
Academic Search, user social interaction scenario, and other stuff. It's going
to be fun!
Amanda
On 9/21/12 1:13 AM, James Weinheimer wrote:
This is very interesting, but how will it work in the real world?
Let's assume that this has all been done with an acceptable
percentage of the records: 60%? 70%? 80%? You are working as a
reference librarian and a senior faculty member on the
Why on earth, when the question is a list of the movies directed by Clint
Eastwood would any reference librarian point to the catalog?!
There is only one answer to this: Because someone wants a list of movies
directed by Clint Eastwood that are held by the library, that she can go check
out
JOnathan, as you say, the catalog can only answer the question: list of
movies directed by CE OWNED BY THE LIBRARY. That wasn't the questioned
posed, and I answered the question as posed. Obviously, if the user is
only interested in those held by the library, the library catalog is the
From Karen Coyle:
Why on earth, when the question is a list of the movies directed by Clint
Eastwood would any reference librarian point to the catalog?! The catalog is
an inventory of the items owned by the library, not an encyclopedia. Any decent
reference librarian knows that, and I suspect
I wasn't trying to change the question, I agree that library catalog is only
the place to answer the question if you are interested in library holdings.
But if the library catalog can't identify which records in it represent movies
directed by Clint Eastwood, then the library catalog can't
But if the library catalog can't identify which records in it represent movies
directed by Clint Eastwood, then the library catalog can't answer the question
of movies directed by clint eastwood owned by the library, right? Which is
why relator codes matter, which is what we're discussing, I
Do you apply this same thinking to any kind of authorship/creating, Mike?
There's no reason for the catalog to be able to provide a list of things by
Mark Twain, because the user can consult a standard reference work to get the
list of everything by Mark Twain, and then use the library catalog
Yes, Jonathan, relator codes matter.
kc
On 9/21/12 11:40 AM, Jonathan Rochkind wrote:
I wasn't trying to change the question, I agree that library catalog is only
the place to answer the question if you are interested in library holdings.
But if the library catalog can't identify which
Do you apply this same thinking to any kind of authorship/creating, Mike?
No. Did I indicate that I do? I thought that very clearly referring to film and
music terms might be a signal that I was limiting my thoughts to those
materials in this thread. Authorship of films and music is rather a
Kelley McGrath wrote:
It's not a trivial problem and we can't get 100%, but we can do far better
than 0%. My goal is to convert what we can to a machine-actionable
form, identify and fix erroneously-converted info where practical, triage
the rest and move forward.
I'm thinking that in an
Right, I was intentionally drawing the analogy that you did not draw, I
realize. Why do your think your argument does not apply to textual authorship
the way it applies to directors of movies?
One answer may be that our data simply isn't capable of answering these
questions for movies because
Jonathan said:
But if the library catalog can't identify which records in it
represent movies directed by Clint Eastwood, then the library catalog
can't answer the question of movies directed by clint eastwood owned
by the library,
In the SLC OPAC MARC search, one can look for directed by Clint
24 matches
Mail list logo
