Thomas said:
And a further point, as is brought up in some entity-relationship modeling
discussions...
Attributes can become entities.
Normally, an attribute is some value by itself. However, that value could also
be pulled in from a table where that value has associated other values or
Karen,
Heidrun, looking at these examples (which naturally do not tell the
whole story) it seems to me that the authority records in your
catalogs do more than just establish preferred name forms; instead,
they approach what to me seems more like the description of a person
entity. The
On 07/06/2012 20:42, Brenndorfer, Thomas wrote:
snip
You still don't get it.
Everything you're doing is based upon some data element somewhere that a user
must act upon. It doesn't have to be traditional bibliographic data for the
FRBR user task to apply. You're still looking for things,
Karen,
I don't know what your authority records look like nor how they are
exchanged and updated. Perhaps that's another difference, and
something we could learn from German libraries?
O.k, so here is some basic information about cataloguing procedures in
Germany. Beware - this is going to
On 6/7/12 3:12 AM, Heidrun Wiesenmüller wrote:
Correct me if I've misunderstood how Anglo-American catalogs work.
I've just tried it out in your own catalog: Typing in, e.g. lew
tolstoi war peace in keyword doesn't give me even one edition, let
alone all of them ... The only way to reach my
On 07/06/2012 18:38, Stephen Early wrote:
snip
James Weinheimer wrote:
snip
Find is morphing into something that is really entirely new and never
seen before. *And with the resources themselves that get more mashed
up and vivisected both manually and automatically, it's increasingly
On 07/06/2012 18:49, Brenndorfer, Thomas wrote:
snip
I think part of the problem is that James believes that FISO (find,
intentify, select, obtain) applies only to traditional access points of
author, title, and subject.
That's incorrect.
Any element, big or small, belonging to any entity
Karen said:
I don't know what your authority records look like nor how they are
exchanged and updated. Perhaps that's another difference, and
something we could learn from German libraries?
I'll give you a couple of examples from the brand-new Common Authority
File (Gemeinsame Normdatei,
Weinheimer
[weinheimer.ji...@gmail.com]
Sent: June-07-12 1:58 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Work manifested in new RDA examples
On 07/06/2012 18:49, Brenndorfer, Thomas wrote:
snip
I think part of the problem is that James believes that FISO (find, intentify,
select
What makes you such an expert on the second objective of the catalog? Oh,
right http://ils.unc.edu/mpact/mpact.php?op=show_treeid=2309 (1994 :-)
According to Madison (2005), the draft versions of the IFLA report had a
relate task.
In the earliest discussion document (drafted by Tillett in
Heidrun, looking at these examples (which naturally do not tell the
whole story) it seems to me that the authority records in your catalogs
do more than just establish preferred name forms; instead, they approach
what to me seems more like the description of a person entity. The
inclusion of
On 6/5/12 10:51 PM, Heidrun Wiesenmüller wrote:
Thomas said:
The Find user task needs to be satisfied. In card catalog
conventions, the main entry heading collocates related works. Using
some sort of (standardized) method for the value of the Work
manifested means that other works can
Karen said:
One advantage of clustering, in my view, is that bibliographic items
can be clustered based on different criteria if desired. Thus
communities that have a different view of Work or Expression from the
*standard* RDA view can see the Work that meets their needs without
having to
Many thanks to Simon for this very useful roundup. It's good to be
assured that there are ways of coping with ordered values in the
representation languages.
So now we only need to adjust RDA. I still wonder whether this
apparent gap in the code (unless I've missed something important) was a
On 06/06/2012 02:43, Simon Spero wrote:*
*snip
In situations where only some authors are given numeric rank, and the
rest are ordered by some other principal (e.g. lexicographic order, or
no order specified), we can just state the constraints on authorship
are, and leave the ordering to be
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Heidrun Wiesenmüller
[wiesenmuel...@hdm-stuttgart.de]
Sent: June-06-12 1:51 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Work manifested in new RDA examples
Thomas said
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Heidrun Wiesenmüller
[wiesenmuel...@hdm-stuttgart.de]
Sent: June-06-12 1:51 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Work manifested
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Work manifested in new RDA examples
On 6/6/12 8:16 AM, Brenndorfer, Thomas wrote:
The users that benefit from seeing all the resources that embody particular
works and expressions include those with roles in acquisition, preservation
Library
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: June-06-12 11:36 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Work manifested in new
Mac said:
I failed the mention record exchange. To exchange records, the
records need to be complete in themselves. Just as UTLAS substituted
text for RSN in access points when exporting records, our ILS would
have to be capable of creating the complete textual record, not only
for display
On 05/06/2012 11:29, Heidrun Wiesenmüller wrote:
snip
We do lots of record exchange in Germany between various systems. In
the exchange format, it's common to have both the heading in textual
form and the national authority control number, but I'm fairly sure it
would be no problem if only the
Thomas,
thank you for this very instructive mail.
It is correct that one Creator element and one Title proper element can
duplicate the Work Manifested element if the form used is the authorized access
point for the work (name + title form), as opposed to an identifier (such as a
URI).
On 05/06/2012 13:54, Heidrun Wiesenmüller wrote:
snip
Come to think of it, this seems to be a general flaw in RDA: For
instance, if there is more than one statement of responsibility, we're
told to record the statements in the order indicated by the sequence,
layout, or typography of the
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Heidrun Wiesenmüller
Sent: June 5, 2012 7:55 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Work manifested in new RDA examples
...
In RDA though, just pointing
On 6/5/12 4:54 AM, Heidrun Wiesenmüller wrote:
T
But I think this raises a very important point: RDA only has one
(repeatable) element creator. Indeed, one wonders why it's not
possible to express the notion of the most important creator somehow.
Wouldn't the obvious solution be a
On Tue, Jun 5, 2012 at 11:53 AM, Karen Coyle li...@kcoyle.net wrote:
Keeping an exact order is less intuitive in RDF. I'm not sure how that
would be done.
This would be good time to try and go over some of the ways that one can
represent this kind of ordered values using some different
Thomas said:
The Find user task needs to be satisfied. In card catalog conventions, the main entry
heading collocates related works. Using some sort of (standardized) method for the value
of the Work manifested means that other works can specify something that will
link back to the work in
Karen,
not necessarily, I believe.
In German library systems, we're used to linking authority records
(mostly for persons and corporate bodies) to bibliographic records,
using the authority control numbers as identifiers. The systems are able
to extract information stored in the authority
@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: [RDA-L] Work manifested in new RDA examples
I am mulling over the data element work manifested in the examples for RDA
bibliographic records released by the JSC some time ago:
http://www.rda-jsc.org/docs/6JSC_RDA_Complete_Examples_%28Bibliographic%29_Revised_2012.pdf
Heidrun, the difference I see between the current practice is that
currently we can link between bibliographic and authority *records* --
while FRBR requires us to link between *entities*. The entities in FRBR
have a somewhat different break-down to our authority data (for example
our
://jeffcolibrary.org
-Original Message-
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Heidrun Wiesenmüller
Sent: Sunday, June 03, 2012 8:51 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: [RDA-L] Work manifested in new RDA
Am 04.06.2012 16:22, schrieb Karen Coyle:
Heidrun, the difference I see between the current practice is that
currently we can link between bibliographic and authority *records* --
while FRBR requires us to link between *entities*. The entities in
FRBR have a somewhat different break-down to
Heidrun said:
In German library systems, we're used to linking authority records
(mostly for persons and corporate bodies) to bibliographic records,
using the authority control numbers as identifiers.
As did UTLAS decades ago.
It would, on principle, also be possible to have an authority
Heidrun said:
Maybe. But think of all the money and resources which has already been
gone into RDA. Makes you wonder why it shouldn't be possible to invest
some of it into an open source solution which would be available to all...
But then, of course, this was mere fantasizing :-(
Certainly I
manifested in new RDA examples
I am mulling over the data element work manifested in the examples for
RDA bibliographic records released by the JSC some time ago:
http://www.rda-jsc.org/docs/6JSC_RDA_Complete_Examples_%28Bibliographic%29_Revised_2012.pdf
For instance, look at the example for Arlene
I am mulling over the data element work manifested in the examples for
RDA bibliographic records released by the JSC some time ago:
http://www.rda-jsc.org/docs/6JSC_RDA_Complete_Examples_%28Bibliographic%29_Revised_2012.pdf
For instance, look at the example for Arlene Taylor's The organization
Heidrun,
I've been assuming, perhaps incorrectly, that references to FRBR
relationships in RDA, like work manifested, are essentially unusable
until there is a FRBR-modeled carrier for the bibliographic data. I have
a similar assumption about things like identifier for the expression,
which
37 matches
Mail list logo
