LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for BIBFRAME Archives


BIBFRAME Archives

BIBFRAME Archives


BIBFRAME@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

BIBFRAME Home

BIBFRAME Home

BIBFRAME  August 2014

BIBFRAME August 2014

Subject:

Re: BibFrame and Linked Data: Identifiers

From:

Thomas Berger <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

[log in to unmask]

Date:

Tue, 5 Aug 2014 15:48:19 +0200

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (109 lines)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


Am 05.08.2014 12:13, schrieb Juha Hakala:

> Sadly especially libraries took their part in blurring that semantics,
> but that is a different story.
>
>> Can you elaborate a bit what you mean by this?

[I noticed that you talk about "semantic identifiers" in the sense
that one can extract (meaningful) information by analyzing the
form of the identifier given. In contrast to that I was talking about
the semantics of the identifier (system), meaning what the "things"
are which are denoted by the identifiers and when they should be
considered equivalent (with respect to that identifier). In the ISBN
example the "semantics of the identifier" IMHO can be expressed in
short by the statement "ISBNs pertain FRBR manifestations"]

So if your question hasn't become mmot by that clarification, here is
one example:

<http://lccn.loc.gov/2012532574> is a two-volume set with three ISBN:
One for each volume and one additional for the set.

LC's record based on AACR tradition represents the set as a whole, thus their
recording of the two additional volume ISBNs must be questioned: If you
take one of these ISBNs and communicate it to your local bookseller the
outcome will be quite different depending on which of the three numbers
you happened to select. That is because ISBN semantics has been deliberately
broken by the library.

Or rather the libraries: All is working well again within an universe
where individual representations of volumes do not exist at all, like
in anglo cataloguing. But problems like above arise again when AACR2
records meet e.g. RAK records from Germany, where usually there exist
three individual bib records exactly corresponding to the set and the
individual volumes linked to it (thus each of the three records
corresponds 1:1 to one of the three ISBNs in our example).

However having aligned entities does not automatically prevent libraries
from wreaking havoc: Since cataloguing is based on the volumes (not
an hypothetical set container) the set ISBN might well enter any of
the individual volume records. And vice versa.
(I just checked the german and austrian union catalogues, indeed all
of them correctly associate the three ISBNs with their respective bib
records, thus my remark has to remain a bit speculative)

There are more well-known examples with respect to ISBNs representing
different print and eBook formats, these are parenthetically resolved
by RDA: Even communities not (or not yet) cataloguing with RDA seem
to become "FRBR aware" and start shaping their entities closer towards
"manifestations" (my subjective impression, I wouln't be able to
substantiate it)

Just the other day in a personal communication Caren Koyle pointed
me to the fact that /public libraries/ may have a different agenda,
(based on the same MARC records) they seem to pursue an approach which
could be described as "expression level cataloguing", by "enriching"
their records with identifiers of resources which others would recognize
as only related ones. (I hope I got that right)



>> Other problem with ISBN semantics is that in some countries publishers would
>> want to assign the same ISBN to all versions of a book. Libraries are opposed to
>> such practice.

[
I could imagine that publishers in those countries will act that way:
When they have internal consensus they simply do it (assuming that
most sales are domestic and libraries won't boycott them anyway).
Curious question: How can the broader community prevent subcommunities
splitting off by introducing their own rules of the game?
]



>> International ISBN agency was closely involved with the registration of the URN
>> namespace. The registration request was written by myself and the (past)
>> chairperson of the International ISBN Agency. I work with the current
>> chairperson to revise the existing ISBN namespace registration (revision is
>> required due to the introduction of ISBN-13).

(So what happened to <
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-urnbis-rfc3187bis-isbn-urn-03 > after it
expired on April 22, 2013?)

>
>> In my opinion, International ISBN Agency has definitely endorsed URN:ISBN scheme.

All right. I derived my allegation from the fact that I was never able
to find any mention of URIs or schemes on http://isbn-international.org/


viele Gruesse
Thomas Berger
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iJwEAQECAAYFAlPg4KIACgkQYhMlmJ6W47NZmAQAmFbRSOJoqR4s/IYsvu7uCEVZ
g3Ca3IQ9GFX5Ua20P7RLBQG5G1+78pNfBbd9fuVQszqAXScK9dDprPrNvE/ZJu8c
8Mg+krXUvbz7Vog6hLN5ToDe0qLprNGbKmUbppf6kVkQZrv2k8KuzsIMS15u62og
O9JR8Lpr753YFJoZnsI=
=97Jp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
July 2011
June 2011

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager