On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 11:54 AM, Rob Styles <[email protected]> wrote: > > So the question is does OL want to talk about a subject heading and a > bibliographic entity that are different things both referring in some way to > the same person, or just refer to the same person. > > Both are possible to model and both are perfectly valid, but having the > bibliographic entity and the subject heading does introduce complexity from > the library that most people don't immediately understand. >
I'm not convinced separate entities makes sense even in the context of a library, but it's definitely going to confuse real world users. Intentionally introducing such an archaic concept into a modern design seems wrong to me. For what it's worth Freebase uses a single entry for the author, the book subject, the film subject, the person the glacier was named after, the influencer of other academics, etc. http://www.freebase.com/view/en/knud_johan_victor_rasmussen To my mind, these linkages are where the power is and forcing indirection through an artificial entity like a card catalog card just weakens the linkages and makes them harder to follow. Tom [25 lines of .sig, advertising, and corporate privacy notices elided] _______________________________________________ Ol-tech mailing list [email protected] http://mail.archive.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ol-tech To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send email to [email protected]
