On 23/02/2012 15:55, Brenndorfer, Thomas wrote:
[Jim Weinheimer wrote:]
These are vital materials, and the public clearly wants them. This has little to do
immediately with bibliographic>metadata but with selection policies. However, if
those materials get selected, then cataloging gets swampe
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of James Weinheimer
Sent: February 23, 2012 4:26 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Revolution in our Minds: Seeing the World Anew
>>>
>The
On 22/02/2012 23:34, Jonathan Rochkind wrote:
On 2/22/2012 5:25 PM, James Weinheimer wrote:
This is why I mentioned in my paper in Buenos Aires the NPTEL free
online courses that lots of people would really and truly find
useful. There are so many of these sorts of resources that it is
absolu
23.02.2012 01:31, Thomas Krichel:
... The poor utilization of the data in systems
comes from the fact that the data is not written for the purpose
of usage by systems. It is always composed with the idea that
a human will read it.
That's something the new "Bibliographic Framework" w
J. McRee Elrod writes
> Johnathan said in another post "The barrier is the data itself ...
> ".
>
> I do not agree. Bibliographic data, AACR/MARC records, are far more
> consistent than any other such data. A greater problem is the poor
> utilization of that data by our systems, and the lack
> -Original Message-
> From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
> [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of J. McRee Elrod
> Sent: February 22, 2012 5:56 PM
> To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
> Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Revolution in our
Jonathan said to James:
>So wait, if I understand right, you're arguing that to 'make a real
>difference to the public', we should stop caring about bibliographic
>metadata at all, and focus on other things that have nothing to do with
>maintaining bibliographic metadata?
Certainly our metadat
James Weinheimer wrote:
> This is not saying that we should not be aiming for linked data. Doing it with
> identifiers would be better (maybe) than what we have now. The biggest
> obstacle of entering the linked data world, in my opinion, is to interoperate
> with what is already there, and will b
On 2/22/2012 5:25 PM, James Weinheimer wrote:
This is why I mentioned in my paper in Buenos Aires the NPTEL free
online courses that lots of people would really and truly find useful.
There are so many of these sorts of resources that it is absolutely
astounding! Unfortunately (I am definite
On 22/02/2012 22:52, Jonathan Rochkind wrote:
I actually don't think it's neccesarily 'marc', although marc is a
terrible terrible format we should be working to abolish. But, hey,
MarcXML is XML, everyone loves XML, or at least is okay with it,
right? And anyone can already turn any Marc into
On 2/22/2012 4:44 PM, James Weinheimer wrote:
So, if the ultimate goal is for us to enter the linked data world, why
do we have to adopt the RDA/FRBR record structure first? Why not do
just do it now?
I think you are right that we don't need to wait for "RDA/FRBR record
structure". And pers
On 22/02/2012 21:43, Kevin M Randall wrote:
I recently came back from an excellent NISO/DCMI webinar presentation by Karen Coyle on linked data
called "Taking Library Data From Here to There" (which I highly recommend). Karen used
William Shakespeare's "As You Like It" as an example in one pa
James Weinheimer wrote:
> This would be all well and good, to claim that FRBR is only an abstraction
> such
> as a Venn diagram, but the fact is, one of the major points for the acceptance
> of RDA with all of its attendant costs and hassle, is that it is the first
> step on
> the road to FRBR (
> -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: February 22, 2012 12:37 PM
> To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
> Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Revolution in our
> -Original Message-
> From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
> [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Benjamin A Abrahamse
> Sent: February 22, 2012 1:52 PM
> To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
> Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Revol
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: Wednesday, February 22, 2012 12:57 PM
To: RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Revolution in our Minds: Seeing the
Mike Tribby wrote:
> Kevin M. Randall replied:
> >Of course it's difficult, and that's why I and others are not even trying to
> >do
> that. We're explicitly (and repeatedly) maintaining that it is for
> librarians.
>
> Perhaps I'm missing the larger--or even the smaller, more subtle--point on
On 22/02/2012 17:36, Kevin M Randall wrote:
In reading FRBR, it is very important to understand that the figures used are
entity-relationship (ER) diagrams, not examples for OPAC displays. The figures
illustrate the relationships between the FRBR entities, for the purpose of
helping the info
James Weinheimer wrote:
> It is very difficult to maintain that
> FRBR is a conceptual model for anyone besides librarians.
Kevin M. Randall replied:
>Of course it's difficult, and that's why I and others are not even trying to
>do that. We're explicitly (and repeatedly) maintaining that it is f
James Weinheimer wrote:
> It is very difficult to maintain that
> FRBR is a conceptual model for anyone besides librarians.
Of course it's difficult, and that's why I and others are not even trying to do
that. We're explicitly (and repeatedly) maintaining that it is for librarians.
Kevin M. Ra
James Weinheimer wrote:
> See the examples under the manifestations and items.
> http://archive.ifla.org/VII/s13/frbr/frbr_current3.htm, There are several,
> e.g.
>
> w1 J. S. Bach's Six suites for unaccompanied cello
>
> * e1 performances by Janos Starker recorded partly in 1963 and
> compl
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of James Weinheimer
Sent: February 22, 2012 3:27 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Revolution in our Minds: Seeing the World Anew
>See the examples un
On 21/02/2012 16:53, Kevin M Randall wrote:
James Weinheimer wrote:
The very purpose of imagining different entities for work, expression,
manifestation and item seem to me to imply that each entity displays one
time. (I realize I am jumping to incredible conclusions and will probably be
excori
On 21/02/2012 20:56, Brenndorfer, Thomas wrote:
How can I make it clearer? I reject the straw man argument because I reject the
entire argument. That includes the>straw man, so I am setting fire to the straw
man.
Well, at least that's useful. Setting fire to a straw man is a colorful way of
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of James Weinheimer
Sent: February 21, 2012 2:48 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Revolution in our Minds: Seeing the World Anew
>How can I make
On 21/02/2012 15:28, Brenndorfer, Thomas wrote:
You still haven't dealt with the straw man argument. [about my not
discussing the totality of the FRBR user tasks--JW]
By copying and pasting some phrases from Cutter onto a definition of
FRBR, and turning around and saying "See, it's no diffe
On 21/02/2012 18:46, Kevin M Randall wrote:
James Weinheimer wrote:
I think that we can probably agree that if a company builds a product the
public does not want, it will be exceedingly difficult to get anybody to buy
that product. Therefore, the task for that company would be to convince the
On 2/21/12 7:53 AM, Kevin M Randall wrote:
James Weinheimer wrote:
The very purpose of imagining different entities for work, expression,
manifestation and item seem to me to imply that each entity displays one
time. (I realize I am jumping to incredible conclusions and will probably be
excoria
James Weinheimer wrote:
> I think that we can probably agree that if a company builds a product the
> public does not want, it will be exceedingly difficult to get anybody to buy
> that product. Therefore, the task for that company would be to convince the
> public to buy something it does not wan
James Weinheimer wrote:
> The very purpose of imagining different entities for work, expression,
> manifestation and item seem to me to imply that each entity displays one
> time. (I realize I am jumping to incredible conclusions and will probably be
> excoriated for it, but FRBR and its examples
C.CA] On Behalf Of James Weinheimer
Sent: February 21, 2012 3:06 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Revolution in our Minds: Seeing the World Anew
On 20/02/2012 21:44, Brenndorfer, Thomas wrote:
In your paper:
"but the public even prefers Amazon"
One aspect that works
20.02.2012 20:04, Kevin M Randall:
I really liked it when you said "So, perhaps the way the catalog
record of the future will look to the public will be that the records
won't appear at all and only the metadata creators will know that the
records even exist!" I think that's exactly the same th
On 20/02/2012 20:04, Kevin M Randall wrote:
Very interesting paper, James. And it is very clear to me where our
communication problem lies in regard to FRBR: you're talking mainly
about the user interface. Of course FRBR is going to appear irrelevant,
because FRBR is talking about the underlyi
On 20/02/2012 21:44, Brenndorfer, Thomas wrote:
In your paper:
"but the public even prefers Amazon"
One aspect that works well in Amazon is that it has a more FRBR-like result
display when showing a record for a book. The different related formats are
predominantly displayed: regular print ve
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Karen Coyle [li...@kcoyle.net]
Sent: February-20-12 4:41 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Revolution in our Minds
Karen Coyle wrote:
> [...] although I am seriously considering
> the idea that in the current environment we have no need for 'authorized
> access points' at all, at least not as they are defined in the
> cataloging rules. Facets make sense to me; authorized access points (as
> defined in library
On 2/20/12 10:20 AM, Brenndorfer, Thomas wrote:
Identification of the resource is a big part of FRBR and cataloging,
but it's a stretch to say that is the exclusive focus. Many
additional elements support "resource discovery" beyond just
identification. But there's a problem when the goal post
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of James Weinheimer
[weinheimer.ji...@gmail.com]
Sent: February-20-12 4:03 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: [RDA-L] Revolution in our
Very interesting paper, James. And it is very clear to me where our
communication problem lies in regard to FRBR: you're talking mainly about the
user interface. Of course FRBR is going to appear irrelevant, because FRBR is
talking about the underlying data, not user display. FRBR makes no a
On 20/02/2012 11:38, Bernhard Eversberg wrote:
20.02.2012 10:03, James Weinheimer:
I just posted the paper on my blog that I gave in Oslo at the Oslo
and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences on Feb. 2 of this
year.
http://blog.jweinheimer.net/2012/02/revolution-in-our-minds-seeing-w
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Karen Coyle [li...@kcoyle.net]
Sent: February-20-12 10:54 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Revolution in our Minds
I really like this, and in particular:
"So, perhaps the way the catalog record of the future will look to the
public will be that the records won’t appear at all and only the
metadata creators will know that the records even exist!"
Metadata should be what you operate on, not what you display
20.02.2012 10:03, James Weinheimer:
I just posted the paper on my blog that I gave in Oslo at the Oslo
and Akershus University College of Applied Sciences on Feb. 2 of this
year.
http://blog.jweinheimer.net/2012/02/revolution-in-our-minds-seeing-world.html
Thanks for this essay which should se
All,
I just posted the paper on my blog that I gave in Oslo at the Oslo and
Akershus University College of Applied Sciences on Feb. 2 of this year.
http://blog.jweinheimer.net/2012/02/revolution-in-our-minds-seeing-world.html
Those who have read my paper in Buenos Aires will note that I expand
44 matches
Mail list logo
