Dear all,
My two cents.
I like the proposal regarding sustainability and its recognition
particularly of the financial realities and the potentials of technologies
/ new methodologies and how they relate to our working practice. (Not to
mention ecological questions)
Setting a standard number of
Dear all,
I also think that it would be useful to clarify who can or cannot vote and
what is the formal basis of voting and to have voting come from this base.
This does not mean that one has to vote if one formally is allowed to,
simply that the voting community is made clear. This would then als
I can say something about why I don't vote for all issues even when I was
present for the discussion. I just don't have expertise in all the many areas
covered by the CRM family. If the issue concerns, for example, whether a
concept in archaeology has been well captured by a scope note, I will a
I think the tension between in-person and online meetings will remain for some
time. That does argue for an annual schedule that has some of each.
I think we have found that there are kinds of issues/business that runs well in
the Zoom format. I think of specific issues that don't require much
Hi Martin, Thanasis,
So far the only IFLA vocabularies that are set up as linked data are here:
ISBD:
https://www.iflastandards.info/isbd
The ISBD vocabularies include several around types of content form or type of
medium, but these are more restricted than any of these CRM classes.
Unimarc:
ht
Dear Thanassi,
I agree with all, except for:
On 7/11/2022 3:50 PM, Athanasios Velios via Crm-sig wrote:
Following this, I am also making a few recommendations on possible
vocabularies based on my previous HW:
* E4: type of period → do not make recommendation
We need actually the interpretatio
Following this, I am also making a few recommendations on possible
vocabularies based on my previous HW:
* E4: type of period → do not make recommendation
* E10: type of transfer of custody
* legal responsibility → possible AAT term
[ownership](http://vocab.getty.edu/page/aat/300055603)
Dear Martin and all,
As far as E82 Actor Appellation is concerned, I would recommend against
referring to FRAD as the model was superseded in 2017 by the IFLA LRM
(which I don't think provides any good match either as such).
I am therefore not so sure it would be a good practice.
Best,
Mélani
