On 12/7/2013 6:24 PM, J. McRee Elrod wrote:
snip
How bibliographic record exchange would work when full manifestation
records no longer exist, and collections have differing manifestations
of works, I've not seen discussed.
/snip
Yes, I have not seen this issue discussed either. Just as
James said:
FRBR proposes to take out data that is now in the manifestation
record and put certain parts of it into a work instance, while
other data will go into an expression instance.
Bibframe has work and instance data, no expression category. What
are different expressions in FRBR/WEMI
James said:
The structure of the card catalog allowed people to do the FRBR user
tasks (where--for those who understood--people really and truly could
find/identify/select/obtain works/expressions/manifestation/items by
their authors/titles/subjects (or at least they could if the catalogers
If I want an English translation of a work, why would I want to
know about the original and other translations?
I think the operative word here is I. What if
someone else wants to know, either a researcher or a library staff member
doing collection development?
The catalog serves many purposes
-244-4070
e-mail: wagst...@illinois.edu
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Cindy Wolff
Sent: Friday, December 06, 2013 3:23 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] FRBR
If I want an English
/ Resource Description and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Cindy Wolff
Sent: Friday, December 06, 2013 3:23 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] FRBR
If I want an English translation of a work, why would I want to
know about the original and other
Kevin said:
FRBR is *not* about user displays. At all.
Nor is RDA about display. But isn't user display the end result of
what we do, and what must concern us? What's the point if our efforts
don't result in intelligible displays?
It would seem to me the basic functional requirement of
***Apologies for cross-posting***
For any UK/EIRE colleagues, who may be interested in this FRBR workshop led by
Anne Welsh (UCL). It is a general FRBR workshop including presentations,
exercises and group discussions; however, the examples used in the workshop
will be drawn from art
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: [RDA-L] FRBR workshop: FRBR for art librarians
***Apologies for cross-posting***
For any UK/EIRE colleagues, who may be interested in this FRBR workshop led by
Anne Welsh (UCL). It is a general FRBR workshop including presentations,
exercises and group
12:04 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: [RDA-L] FRBR workshop: FRBR for art librarians
***Apologies for cross-posting***
For any UK/EIRE colleagues, who may be interested in this FRBR workshop led by
Anne Welsh (UCL). It is a general FRBR workshop including presentations,
exercises
On 27/02/2012 05:02, Kelley McGrath wrote:
snip
There has been some discussion about the relationship between the FRBR
entities (especially group 1) and end-user display or underlying data
structure.
I think OLAC's FRBR-based prototype for moving image materials
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of James Weinheimer
Sent: February 27, 2012 5:02 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] FRBR and display
...
This is a very interesting project
There has been some discussion about the relationship between the FRBR
entities (especially group 1) and end-user display or underlying data
structure.
I think OLAC's FRBR-based prototype for moving image materials
(http://blazing-sunset-24.heroku.com/) is a good example of an interface
The ALCTS FRBR IG has received enough responses to fill our allotted time.
We thank everyone for their interest.
Karen Anderson
Chair, FRBR IG
--
Karen Anderson
Authority Control Librarian
Backstage Library Works
533 East 1860 South
Provo, Utah 84606
1-800-288-1265
kander...@bslw.com
*Please excuse cross postings.*
The ALCTS FRBR Interest Group invites your participation at ALA Annual
Conference, at 10:30 a.m. -12:00 on Friday, June 24, 2011, at the Morial
Convention Center, Room 338.
Co-sponsored by ALA, Cataloging Classification Quarterly, and MARCIVE,
Inc.
There
11.04.2011 22:20, Weinheimer Jim:
As one of those veteran catalogers, I honestly do not see how the
changes in RDA have a lot of potential.
If the test records are anything to go by, then indeed. And what
else are we to go by if that's what we're gonna get?
That stuff barely scratches the
Myers, John F. wrote:
snip
One could argue interminably the pros and cons of abbreviating or not.
I can see merits to both sides, as well as to native language
representation of missing date issue. (That is, the replacement of
[s.l.] with [place of publication not identified], where [s.l.]
Quoting Bernhard Eversberg e...@biblio.tu-bs.de:
Is the part-whole relationship, for example, even being
considered? It wasn't under AACR2 although it would have been possible.
Bernard, I'm not sure what you mean by even being considered (by
whom?) but FRBR and RDA do define all of the
James Weinheimer wrote:
I don't think I am missing the point of RDA, and the abbreviations are a
great example. Do we really believe that a simple rule change will solve
whatever problems the public supposedly has with abbreviations in the
catalog? Sorry, but I find that very naive.
Did you
Kevin M. Randall wrote:
snip
James Weinheimer wrote:
I don't think I am missing the point of RDA, and the abbreviations are a
great example. Do we really believe that a simple rule change will solve
whatever problems the public supposedly has with abbreviations in the
catalog? Sorry, but I
Subject:Re: [RDA-L] FRBR
Sent by:Resource
: [RDA-L] FRBR
Sent by:Resource Description and Access / Resource Description
and Access RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
James Weinheimer wrote:
I am certainly not saying that I know what people want when they search
for
information. That can only be discovered after research
Deborah Tomaras wrote:
I would be curious to see links to evidence-based papers from rigorous
research studies that prove that patrons want FRBR/WEMI in searching,
retrieval, etc. I've found nothing on the IFLA website, where I would have
thought they would reside. All papers there
-Original Message-
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Kevin M. Randall
Sent: April 12, 2011 2:10 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] FRBR
...
(BTW, please don't get hung
Patrons want the director's cut of a motion picture, or they don't want
the colorized version of a classic bw film. They may or may not care if
they will get widescreen or full screen. They want translations into
English of works, and sometimes they want them by a particular translator.
I cannot wait for the day when (assuming we do implement RDA) instead of a
blank template in OCLC that we have to encode in MARC, we get a screen which
prompts us to fill in values for RDA elements. Catalogers shouldn't need to
know the behind the scenes coding and communication standard, we
-Original Message-
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Mike Tribby
Sent: April 12, 2011 3:43 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] FRBR
...
That would all be great, and I
Brenndorfer, Thomas tbrenndor...@library.guelph.on.ca wrote:
Coming up this month is the first programming to add RDA element views to ILS
software at the MARC tag level:
http://www.rdatoolkit.org/blog/119
The software in question being Connexion Client 2.30, just announced today.
--
Mark
I've been following this discussion with interest, but feel the need to
inject an unhappy reality into it. I attended a program on Friday, given by
a Digital Strategist, an ALA mover and shaker. This person dismissed
all of cataloging in a single sentence, offhand, while discussing something
else.
-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] FRBR
Every time I see a discussion about how hard FRBR is to understand (which it
is), how difficult the RDA Toolkit is to use (which it is), and the fact
that RDA will actually increase the amount of work we have to do to each
bibliographic record (which it does), I
] On Behalf Of Aleta Copeland
Sent: April 11, 2011 10:07 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] FRBR
However, you will find her as a 700.
**
**
Aleta Copeland, MLS
Head of Technical Services
Ouachita Parish
Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Guy Vernon Frost
Sent: Monday, April 11, 2011 11:19 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] FRBR
I concur... very nice summation. Change needs to occur, but it seems to me it's
mary.c.lasa...@vanderbilt.edu
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 11:25:36 -0500
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] FRBR
I also agree. Earlier today I saw the PCC Discussion Paper on RDA
implementation. Perhaps this message would be an appropriate response. That
position paper seems
Debirah Tomares said:
Her vision includes librarians facilitating discovery of soft
sources of information (her words), as opposed to authoritative [i.e.,
published] sources. In doing so, she said (roughly paraphrasing): Those
sources all have records in OCLC anyway ...
Of the special libraries
and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Billie Hackney
Sent: Monday, April 11, 2011 10:58 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] FRBR
Every time I see a discussion about how hard FRBR is to understand (which it
is), how difficult the RDA Toolkit is to use (which
Subject:Re: [RDA-L] FRBR
It may be simplistic (but hey! that's what I do!), but I think the competing
views of RDA's potential benefits and ultimate utility split along the lines of
what kind of libraries are being discussed and what kind of libraries the
individuals doing the discussing inhabit. With a few significant
]
Sent: Monday, April 11, 2011 12:44 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] FRBR
It may be simplistic (but hey! that's what I do!), but I think the competing
views of RDA's potential benefits and ultimate utility split along the lines of
what kind of libraries are being
-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Lasater, Mary Charles
Sent: Monday, April 11, 2011 11:26 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] FRBR
I also agree.
Mary Charles Lasater
Authorities Coordinator
Vanderbilt University
From: Resource Description and Access
Well, you can't stop there, Mike.
Which kinds of libraries favor which, etc.?
To answer Kathleen's perfectly reasonable question and observation in reverse
order:
I'd rather not say publically at this point in this fascinating discussion
(though I think a close reading of my previous postings
] On Behalf Of Billie Hackney
Sent: Monday, April 11, 2011 10:58 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] FRBR
Every time I see a discussion about how hard FRBR is to understand (which it
is), how difficult the RDA Toolkit is to use (which it is), and the fact that
RDA will actually
-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] *On Behalf Of *Billie Hackney
*Sent:* Monday, April 11, 2011 11:58 AM
*To:* RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
*Subject:* Re: [RDA-L] FRBR
Every time I see a discussion about how hard FRBR is to understand
(which it is), how difficult the RDA Toolkit is to use (which
Aleta Copeland acopel...@oplib.org wrote:
Earlier today I saw the PCC Discussion Paper on RDA implementation. Perhaps
this message would be an appropriate response. That position paper seems
oblivious to the current ‘real’ environment.
Where did you see this report? Do you have a link to it?
Denton, TX 76203-5017
jean.har...@unt.edu
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Billie Hackney
Sent: Monday, April 11, 2011 10:58 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] FRBR
Every time I
Harden, Jean wrote:
snip
My experience leads me to the opposite conclusion. For people who don’t already
know how to catalog, much of RDA *is* simpler, more transparent, and so forth
than AACR2. It’s only those of us who have been using AACR2 for years that have
so much trouble grasping the new
Mary Charles Lasater wrote:
Earlier today I saw the PCC Discussion Paper on RDA
implementation. [...] That
position paper seems oblivious to the current 'real' environment.
Mary, could you give some specific reasons why you say that about the
position paper? To me it seems like it couldn't
Quoting Weinheimer Jim j.weinhei...@aur.edu:
I have no doubt that experienced catalogers can learn RDA. After
all, the final product is not all that different from what we do
now. The problem for experienced catalogers is to master a new set
of tools that are very expensive in comparison
Meanwhile, speculation without facts isn't terribly useful. I think about how
much of the time used up in this debate couldn't have been better spent
gathering actual information.
Well, sure, but seeing as how we're waiting on the U.S. national libraries to
come to a decision anyway it's hard
and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Kevin M. Randall
Sent: Monday, April 11, 2011 1:03 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] FRBR
Mary Charles Lasater wrote:
Earlier today I saw the PCC Discussion Paper on RDA
implementation. [...] That
position paper seems
Deborah Tomares said:
Those sources all have records in OCLC anyway ...
P.S. How does she think those recores *get* into OCLC? A cataloguer
creates them!
Deborah, I realize this was not your opinion, widely shared though it
be. You reported it well.
Yes, I do suspect steam is coming out of
Megan Curran said:
It seems like the goal of RDA is to bring libraries into web-based
data description in a real way.
Coding and ILS development would take us into being web-based,
not cataloguing rule changes, with rare exceptions.
I do not see in the budgets of our clients the ILSs which
I do not see in the budgets of our clients the ILSs which would be
required to take advantage of, for example, 7XX$i values expressing
relationships.
I'd say that's a failing of the ILS marketplace, not RDA. I think the ILSs are
just waiting for RDA to be finalized before rolling out new
Megan Curran wrote:
snip
I just feel like if our catalogs are on the web, and most of what we catalog is
in the web environment, then the rules should be made for that environment.
Using coding tricks and discovery layers to force paper-based cataloging rules
into a web environment amounts to
Not all libraries perceive the same needs as other libraries. If the ILSs are
just waiting for RDA to be finalized before rolling out new iterations that can
take advantage of the relational properties then why haven't they already
rolled out ILSs that feature technology [which] already exists,
Weinheimer Jim j.weinhei...@aur.edu wrote:
Which changes do you have in mind? ... The lack of the $b in titles?
Huh?
--
Mark K. Ehlert Minitex
Coordinator University of Minnesota
Bibliographic Technical 15 Andersen Library
Services (BATS) Unit
At 03:34 PM 4/11/2011, Mike Tribby wrote:
Not all libraries perceive the same needs as other libraries. If
the ILSs are just waiting for RDA to be finalized before rolling
out new iterations that can take advantage of the relational
properties then why haven't they already rolled out ILSs that
The questions above indicate that the questioner is missing the point of RDA
entirely.
Of course they do. Has this list outlived its usefulness?
Mike Tribby
Senior Cataloger
Quality Books Inc.
The Best of America's Independent Presses
mailto:mike.tri...@quality-books.com
I agree. We are swimming against the tide.
Marilyn Montalvo
Head Technical Services Dept.
Library System
University of
Puerto Rico, Rio Piedras Campus
Every time I see a
discussion about how hard FRBR is to understand (which
it is),
how difficult the RDA Toolkit is to use (which it is), and
-Original Message-
From: Brenndorfer, Thomas tbrenndor...@library.guelph.on.ca
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2011 18:11:53 -0400
world has not stopped with FRBR. There's FRBRoo for example, which integrates
museum data with library data as
outlined in FRBR, and so expands FRBR significantly with
Meeting is cancelled.
-Original Message
-
From: Gene Fieg
Sent: 2011/04/08, 00:52
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] FRBR
This reminds me of that moment: how hundreds of years worth
of experience is on this list? And there is no agreement on
something like *what is a work*?! How can we ever hope for
any kind of consistency? Of course it goes without saying
that with no consistency, everyone will be fated
Jim Weinheimer wrote:
This reminds me of that moment: how hundreds of years worth of
experience is on this list? And there is no agreement on something
like *what is a work*?! How can we ever hope for any kind of
consistency? Of course it goes without saying that with no
consistency, everyone
Matei
Sent: 08 April 2011 08:59
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] FRBR
This reminds me of that moment: how hundreds of years worth
of experience is on this list? And there is no agreement on
something like *what is a work*?! How can we ever hope for
any kind
Jim, I think you're over-thinking it. Confronted with a new book,
don't we examine it and check our favorite database(s) to verify
whether it's a new work or a version of an existing work? If new, we
just treat it at the manifestation level. Under the
currently-anticipated regime for
Hal Cain wrote:
snip
Jim, I think you're over-thinking it. Confronted with a new book,
don't we examine it and check our favorite database(s) to verify
whether it's a new work or a version of an existing work? If new, we
just treat it at the manifestation level. Under the
currently-anticipated
-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] FRBR
In conventional cataloging practice, and in what is suggested by
FRBR/RDA as I understand it... no, it doesn't really matter. A movie
version is a different work.
I think an argument could be made that a _very simple_ movie version,
that is really just video
: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Onderwerp: Re: [RDA-L] FRBR
Wait, wait!
I thought the entire purpose of FRBR/RDA was to collocate everything together
so that patrons would see an entity-relationship display... therefore the
book and the movie are only different expressions of the same work. So
now
-Original Message-
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description
and Access [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of
Kathleen Lamantia
Sent: 8 aprilie 2011 15:41
I thought the entire purpose of FRBR/RDA was to collocate
everything together so that
Hello,
As the person who put the FRBR representation up on the web, I thought
I'd mention a couple of things about it.
It was intended to accompany introductory internal training for RDA and
FRBR, so its main intention is to illustrate as clearly and graphically
as I could how FRBR works
-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] FRBR
Well, it seems to me that Pride and Prejudice is Jane Austen's conception
(work) no matter what form (expression) it takes, so I would answer your 2nd
question, is the creator the same? with yes. As to valid alternatives, that
seems to me to be cataloger's
-
From: Peter Schouten [mailto:pschou...@ingressus.nl]
Sent: Friday, April 08, 2011 8:47 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] FRBR
Ask yourself: is the movie a valid alternative to the book? Is the creator of
the movie the same as the creator of the book (if the answer
To: Kathleen Lamantia
Cc: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] FRBR
But the creator of the book and the creator(s) of the movie are NOT the
same people. The movie contains aspects such as costume, set, choice of
shots, sound, acting, and on and on that are the result of the actions
-Original Message-
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Weinheimer Jim
Sent: April 8, 2011 10:25 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] FRBR
Brenndorfer, Thomas wrote:
snip
I've finally figured out a way to express what FRBR/RDA feels like to me
after several years of study and practice.
I feel as if I've fallen down the rabbit hole and am searching for Alice while
accompanied by Franz Kafka.
Yow! That's at least the second specific reference to the RDA
Well, it seems to me that Pride and Prejudice is Jane Austen's conception
(work) no matter what form (expression)
it takes, so I would answer your 2nd question, is the creator the same?
with yes. As to valid alternatives,
that seems to me to be cataloger's judgment, so we are left with a
On 08/04/2011 16:37, Brenndorfer, Thomas wrote:
snip
RDA would call those Derivative Works under the Related Work element.
LibraryThing calls them Related Movies.
Neither RDA nor LibraryThing calls them the same work.
/snip
So, what is this record? http://www.librarything.com/work/2264 Is it a
, 2011 10:54 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] FRBR
I've finally figured out a way to express what FRBR/RDA feels like to me
after several years of study and practice.
I feel as if I've fallen down the rabbit hole and am searching for Alice while
accompanied by Franz Kafka
5 Star library.
-Original Message-
From: Jonathan Rochkind [mailto:rochk...@jhu.edu]
Sent: Friday, April 08, 2011 11:02 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] FRBR
Well, it seems to me that Pride and Prejudice is Jane Austen's conception
(work) no matter what
___
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Weinheimer Jim
[j.weinhei...@aur.edu]
Sent: April-08-11 10:56 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] FRBR
On 08/04/2011
___
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Kathleen Lamantia
[klaman...@starklibrary.org]
Sent: April-08-11 11:07 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] FRBR
You
Kathleen Lamantia wrote:
Well, it seems to me that Pride and Prejudice is Jane Austen's conception
(work) no matter what form (expression) it takes, so I would answer your 2nd
question, is the creator the same? with yes. As to valid alternatives, that
seems to me to be cataloger's judgment,
: [RDA-L] FRBR
___
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Kathleen Lamantia
[klaman...@starklibrary.org]
Sent: April-08-11 11:07 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L
John, that is a beautiful, eloquent explanation, one that
works for me. Thank you.
Diana Brooking (206) 685-0389
Cataloging Librarian (206) 685-8782 fax
Suzzallo Library dbroo...@u.washington.edu
University of Washington
Box 352900
Seattle WA
and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Myers, John F.
Sent: Friday, April 08, 2011 10:32 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] FRBR
Kathleen Lamantia wrote:
Well, it seems to me that Pride and Prejudice is Jane Austen's conception
(work) no matter what
No librarian worth his/her salt would, which is my point about FRBR/RDA. I
am NOT arguing in favor of it,
I'm only trying to deal with it as it is - or appears to be, or is trying to
be - thus my reference to Carroll and Kafka
I am very confused about your point of FRBR/RDA. It does
Jonathan Rochdind said:
I am very confused about your point of FRBR/RDA. It does NOT decide
that a movie is the same work as the book it's based on -- just like
AACR2.
Except that RDA does not require the 7XX for the book/movie in the
record for the other be justified in the description. The
Mac Elrod wrote:
Except that RDA does not require the 7XX for the book/movie in the
record for the other be justified in the description. The
relationship may be in a 7XX$i, which the OPAC may or may not display.
Sound to me like a problem with the OPAC, not with the cataloging rules.
-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of D. Brooking
Sent: Friday, April 08, 2011 11:40 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] FRBR
John, that is a beautiful, eloquent explanation, one that works for me. Thank
you.
Diana Brooking (206) 685-0389
Cataloging Librarian
-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Leigh, Andrea
Sent: Friday, April 08, 2011 2:56 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] FRBR
Jane Austen's novel was the basis for the motion picture Pride and
Prejudice, but it is not the work Austen conceptualized. This would be
like someone
-Original Message-
From: Stephen Early sea...@crl.edu
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2011 20:19:47 +
This would be
like someone thinking that a t-shirt with the Mona Lisa on it is the work
of DaVinci.
Which reminds me of Marcel Duchamp's L.H.O.O.Q. (Mona Lisa with a mustache)
and the
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] FRBR
This would be
like someone thinking that a t-shirt with the Mona Lisa on it is the work
of DaVinci.
Which reminds me of Marcel Duchamp's L.H.O.O.Q. (Mona Lisa with a mustache) and
the Andy Warhol silk screen prints of Mona Lisa. How would these fit into the
FRBR model
On 08/04/2011 22:19, Stephen Early wrote:
snip
Which reminds me of Marcel Duchamp's L.H.O.O.Q. (Mona Lisa with a mustache) and
the Andy Warhol silk screen prints of Mona Lisa. How would these fit into the
FRBR model? (enjoying this very interesting discussion)
/snip
I agree that this is an
-Original Message-
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Pat Sayre McCoy
Sent: April 8, 2011 5:15 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] FRBR
I really should stay out
-Original Message-
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Weinheimer Jim
Sent: April 8, 2011 5:29 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] FRBR
.
Individuals can now add
and Access / Resource Description and Access
[RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] on behalf of Jeff Peckosh [jpeck...@yahoo.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2011 12:13 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: [RDA-L] FRBR
I started panicking over the fact that I still don't understand FRBR. Can
anybody
07.04.2011 08:03, Trickey, Keith:
Just a gentle aside - if members of the bibliogrpahic engine room
struggle with this - how is the wider community supposed to make
sense of it?
At the end of the day, what matters is if and how catalog users
can make sense of it, if not even become
Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA writes:
I started panicking over the fact that I still don't understand FRBR. Can
anybody please tell me where I can find a literature that explains what FRBR
is in a simple English?
I
Here's a nice visual representation of the
Work/Expression/Manifestation/Item facets of the FRBR model I found via
Twitter this morning: http://www.aurochs.org/frbr_example/frbr_example.html
Only problem with it, to me, is that it doesn't link the novel, film, and
screenplay together...
This is nice, thanks for providing it Amanda. Besides the links between the related
works, I saw one other error: in the item for the DVD, the material type is shown as
BOOK.
Adam
^^
Adam L. Schiff
Principal Cataloger
University of Washington Libraries
Box
...@yahoo.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2011 12:13 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: [RDA-L] FRBR
I started panicking over the fact that I still don't understand FRBR. Can
anybody please tell me where I can find a literature that explains what FRBR
is in a simple English?
I also don't know
1 - 100 of 168 matches
Mail list logo
