t of America's Independent Presses
>
> mailto:mike.tri...@quality-books.com
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
> [mailto:rd...@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] On Behalf Of Mark Ehlert
> Sent: Wednesday, Septem
cess
[mailto:rd...@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] On Behalf Of Mark Ehlert
Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 2010 10:02 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Interesting conversations about RDA and FRBR ...
J. McRee Elrod wrote:
> Won't FRBR result in even more unwanted item
J. McRee Elrod wrote:
> Won't FRBR result in even more unwanted item records being displayed?
> Will one be able to turn of FRBR display in OPACs? I don't *need* to
> see the record for the Danish original of the murder mystery I want to
> read!
How would the OPAC know to display only English-la
J. McRee Elrod wrote:
Jim said:
>I remember working on single volume conference publications that
>could take days because each one had dozens of individual papers, and
>instead of one item, the single volume became 40 or 60 or more
>records.
Picture a work/expression/manifestation record for ea
Jonathan- I need to correct you on one point below: I never suggested
that one doesn't need records for WEMs; in fact, my intent in this
post was to posit an environment where result sets could be electively
reified into explicit records defined by the query, which in turn
could have explicit state
I've written about the set-theoretic view too, also crediting Svenonious:
http://bibwild.wordpress.com/2007/12/07/frbr-considered-as-set-relationships/
(that one is short and sweet and recommend it)
and
http://bibwild.wordpress.com/2010/03/17/notes-frbr-wemi-entities-physicality-interchangeabili
Jim said:
>I remember working on single volume conference publications that
>could take days because each one had dozens of individual papers, and
>instead of one item, the single volume became 40 or 60 or more
>records.
Picture a work/expression/manifestation record for each paper, and you
have
Bernhard said:
>,,, the idea of the "result set"
In the past few months databases I search, e.g.: the LC online
catalogue, TLC's ITS, Shaw Cable's Movie Central title search, seem to
have switched to keyword, resulting in large result sets of irrelevant
items which must be looked through for the
Reply-To: Resource Description and Access / Resource Description and Access
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Interesting conversations about RDA and FRBR ...
Can someone please tell me how to get off of this listserv? Thank you
Jo A. Hudson
Technical Assistant
Logan County Libraries
220 North Ma
and Access
[mailto:rd...@listserv.lac-bac.gc.ca] On Behalf Of Bernhard Eversberg
Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 2010 8:16 AM
To: RDA-L@LISTSERV.LAC-BAC.GC.CA
Subject: Re: [RDA-L] Interesting conversations about RDA and FRBR ...
Weinheimer Jim wrote:
> But first of all, liberate works that are
Weinheimer Jim wrote:
But first of all, liberate works that are now incarcerated
inside all sorts of "collections" or "multiparts" (whose "workness"
is somewhat dubious). Here, the notion of the (physical) "item" is
really not the best of concepts, in terms of usability of the
catalog, to base
Bernhard Eversberg wrote:
For classical music, it is indispensable. Apart from this, I think, one
must certainly retain it for prolific authors, difficult though they are
to define.
LibraryThing, from the outset, had no such notion. Later, however,
they realized that some kind of "grouping" was ba
Weinheimer Jim wrote:
I don't know if I agree that the identification of the work has to be
done somewhere. Perhaps in some formats (I am thinking primarily of
music), it is more important than others,
For classical music, it is indispensable. Apart from this, I think, one
must certainly retai
Bernhard Eversberg wrote:
It also goes well with the
paradigm of all known retrieval systems, based as it is on the idea of
the "result set", resulting from a query that uses attributes of various
kinds, and all of them can be viewed as attributes of items. Certain
combinations of attributes defin
Diane I. Hillmann wrote:
I'd like to point those of you interested in the more technical side of
discussions on RDA and FRBR to a conversation going on in the public
Linked Library Data discussion list, starting here with a message from
Karen Coyle:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public
Folks:
I'd like to point those of you interested in the more technical side of
discussions on RDA and FRBR to a conversation going on in the public
Linked Library Data discussion list, starting here with a message from
Karen Coyle:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-lld/2010Sep/0049.
16 matches
Mail list logo
