26.11.2012 17:08, James Weinheimer:
.. an interesting question: Has Dublin Core failed? While it
certainly can't be claimed a success, it has been folded into other
initiatives, e.g. OAI and RDFa. Yet it has not been taken up by many
organizations.
Although having been the aim of the project:
A good tutorial on RDF graphs can be found here:
http://www.linkeddatatools.com/semantic-web-basics. One can see the same kind
of entity, attribute and relationship structure as in FRBR, but here is is all
structured by relationships in the form of statements (or triples), and
arranged in graph
Anyway, I really don't like this speculating around in this list
with no input from those who should know more and might easily resolve
errors in our wild guesses. Can this be called a discussion list? It is
rather another Speakers' Corner, inconsequential at the end of the day.
Not the first time
26.11.2012 12:17, James Weinheimer:
Let's face it: the FRBR structure is bizarre and difficult even for
trained catalogers to grasp.
... and to apply consistently end efficiently.
The FRBR user tasks are from an earlier time, and in any case, the
public hasn't been able to do them since keyw
On 11/26/2012 09:53 AM, Bernhard Eversberg wrote:
A lot of speculation. We have to simply ask for the reasoning that
resulted in the draft as it is. Maybe - another speculation - they came
to the conclusion (after studying Jim Weinheimer's musings, for
instance) that WEMI is impracticable or not
Am 26.11.2012 09:43, schrieb Heidrun Wiesenmüller:
But I still find it very hard to accept that BIBFRAME in its first
draft (if I understand it correctly) doesn't seem to accommodate for
modeling a work in the abstract FRBR sense - at least not in the
bibliographic part of BIBFRAME. Perhaps it w
Thomas Brenndorfer said:
In several early chapters in RDA there is only a thin blue line separating the movement
from manifestation attributes to item attributes, and from work attributes to expression
attributes. For an example of a boundary, see the blue separator "Other Identifying
Attribu
One of the first things I noticed was the example that showed "Tunnel books" as
a subject. While this may reflect (incorrect) MARC 21 coding as 650, the resource/work
being described is clearly not ABOUT tunnel books, it IS a tunnel book. The correct MARC
coding of course would be either 655
24.11.2012 11:37, Heidrun Wiesenmüller:
... BIBFRAME simply _must_ be able to
model RDA data in the necessary granularity and specificity.
That should indeed go without saying. And besides, it ought to be
integrated with RDA documentation as well, so as to enable linking
in both directions.
tion and Access
> [mailto:RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA] On Behalf Of Heidrun Wiesenmüller
> Sent: November 24, 2012 5:37 AM
> To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
> Subject: Re: [RDA-L] BIBFRAME model document announced
>
> This is indeed rather unsettling.
>
> Funnily enough, th
e ourselves to the
course which has been heretofore pursued"--Eliza R. Snow, 1842.
-----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: Friday, November 23, 2012 3:41 PM
To: R
the course which has been heretofore pursued"--Eliza R. Snow, 1842.
-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: Friday, November 23, 2012 3:41 PM
To: RDA-L@LISTSER
Posted to Bibframe:
>http://www.loc.gov/marc/transition/pdf/marcld-report-11-21-2012.pdf
Creative Work - a resource reflecting a conceptual essence of the
cataloging item.
Instance - a resource reflecting an individual, material embodiment
of the Work.
Authority - a resource reflecting
13 matches
Mail list logo
