I would like to draw the list's attention to the following article:
An ideal model for an information system for fiction and its application:
Kirjasampo and Semantic Web by Kaisa Hypen and Eetu Makela (with diacritics:
Hypén and Mäkelä). Library Review, Vol 60, no. 4, 2011, p. 279-292.
http://w
> -Original Message-
> From: J. McRee Elrod [mailto:m...@slc.bc.ca]
> Sent: March 16, 2012 5:48 PM
> To: Brenndorfer, Thomas
> Cc: RDA-L@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca
> Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Card catalogue lessons
>
>
> And again, the media type is "projected" not "projector". "Computer"
> is th
James Weinheimer wrote:
> On 16/03/2012 16:40, Kevin M Randall wrote:
>
> And that kind of cooperation [e.g. with IMDB -- JW] is *exactly* the
> kind of thing that linked data, and data definitions such as the RDA
> elements, are intended to make possible! Without having precise data
> def
Finally, why is it wrong to expect to search a library catalog for Steven
Spielberg as a producer only? Because it's
not the right tool, whether anybody likes it or not.
James Weinheimer weinheimer.ji...@gmail.com
I disagree with James here. I think the library catalog ought to be able
to
On 16/03/2012 16:40, Kevin M Randall wrote:
And that kind of cooperation [e.g. with IMDB -- JW] is *exactly* the kind of
thing that linked data, and data definitions such as the RDA elements, are
intended to make possible! Without having precise data definitions, it will
never come about. A
Thomas said:
>"Computer" is straight out of AACR2. AACR2 uses "computer" when describing
>computer carriers (AACR2 9.5B1), as in:
>computer chip cartridge
>computer disk
>computer optical disc
>computer tape cartridge
>computer tape cassettee
>computer tape reel
These carriers are *very* rarely
In mentioning "users" in this discussion, no one seems really to have mentioned
the effects of RDA implementation on the various other departments in a library
other than the catalogers. There are more things than the cost of RDA and the
RDA Toolkit and the training of catalogers to consider. Co
James Weinheimer wrote:
> I only hope that nobody ever searches our catalogs for someone as an
> editor because they *will never* and *can never* get results they can rely
> upon. How much would it cost to add all of those relators for all of those
> millions of records? What an incredibly ironic
On 16/03/2012 15:42, Kevin M Randall wrote:
James Weinheimer wrote:
Of course, I don't agree with this reasoning. I don't think it is essential.
Adding the relator information is additional labor for no tangible gains.
While I agree that the public has terrible problems with our catalog
records
James Weinheimer wrote:
> Of course, I don't agree with this reasoning. I don't think it is essential.
> Adding the relator information is additional labor for no tangible gains.
> While I agree that the public has terrible problems with our catalog
> records, this would be ranked near the very bo
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of James Weinheimer
Sent: March 16, 2012 10:06 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] RDA/FRBR and the Business Case; Was:RDA as the
collaboratively created wa
On 16/03/2012 14:47, Brenndorfer, Thomas wrote:
The world is moving on and leaving FISO behind. For instance, "find" is turning into "search"
which means>creating an "intelligent agent" for our information needs. That is what Tim Berners-Lee
wants and is one of the>primary goals of the Semanti
> -Original Message-
> From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
> [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Bernhard Eversberg
> Sent: March 16, 2012 6:27 AM
> To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
> Subject: Re: [RDA-L] RDA/FRBR and the Business Case; Was
From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
[mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of James Weinheimer
Sent: March 16, 2012 5:41 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] RDA/FRBR and the Business Case; Was:RDA as the
collaboratively created way
Am 16.03.2012 10:41, schrieb James Weinheimer:
I have tried to elaborate on this in some of my podcasts. "Search"
using all kinds of incredibly detailed information about you, and
your friends, and their friends, and your browsing habits, and it
analyses unbelievably deeply into everything you l
On 15/03/2012 21:33, Casey A Mullin wrote:
What I'm reading in Mr. Weinheimer's criticisms is not a rejection of
FISO itself. (I personally find FISO so intuitive as to be axiomatic.)
What he often addresses are not these tasks themselves, but the
**methods** used to fulfill said tasks. To be
Am 16.03.2012 09:35, schrieb James Weinheimer:
Once again, if there were evidence that it does make such a major
difference to the public, that would be one thing, but there has been
nothing. We are all just supposed to simply believe it. Yet, I can't
believe this will make a difference to any
On 16/03/2012 00:33, Brenndorfer, Thomas wrote:
RDA's relationship designator is "defendant" to specify the relationship of the
person to the work. Unlike anything prior, RDA tells it exactly like it is.
Catalogers did this before. Here is an example of "defendant" in the
Sacco and Vanzetti
18 matches
Mail list logo
