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: Proposal to handle "Providers" differently

From:

Karen Coyle <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Fri, 15 Aug 2014 09:30:36 -0700

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (156 lines)

On 8/15/14, 8:22 AM, [log in to unmask] wrote:
> It seems clear to me that there are at least a few meanings being overlaid on this one piece of text:
>
> 1) A place at which the artifact in hand was created.
>
> 2) The location of the central business accommodations of the publishing entity.
>   
> 3) A place or places at which the publishing entity wishes it to be known that they do business.

Yes, thanks. Good summary.

>
> probably others…

...if we look hard enough. ;-)


>
> It seems to me that 1) is a property of the publishing event, and 2) and 3) are time-varying properties of the publishing entity. Perhaps they have been elided in our metadata because they have frequently, in the past, been identical-- but is that the norm today?

I'm not sure that's the reason, although it does seem that place has 
become much more fluid than it was before publishing became a more 
global business. As I read the cataloging rules, one describes "the item 
in hand" and rarely goes beyond that, as the effort would be 
considerable. So in fact "place of publication" and "publisher" are 
really "place on publication that is printed on the title page" and 
"publisher, as printed on the title page." This is useful data, but 
shouldn't be assumed to mean any more than that. In fact, the thing that 
we call "publisher" is often not the name of the publishing *house* but 
of an imprint. So I think that we have in a sense "misused" the terms 
"place" and "publisher"  as shorthand for "transcription of place and 
publisher."

I know I've said this before, but we need to understand, deeply, the 
actual semantics of our data before we decide to implement this same 
data in RDF. And, as I have also said before, RDF is not a data 
serialization. A key thing to keep in mind about RDF is that it has 
specific semantics -- in a way that we haven't addressed in the past. Up 
until now, we have lived with a fair amount of ambiguity, leaving it to 
the catalog user to make sense of things.[1] Just see the discussion 
about whether authority control is about persons or name forms. We can't 
just take what we have in MARC and plop it into triples and declare 
"mission accomplished." I'm convinced that we have to re-think a lot of 
our current data practices. This is a good example of that, as your 3 
conflated concepts demonstrates.

kc
[1] A short analysis of the many semantics of the 240 field:
http://futurelib.pbworks.com/w/page/35201781/Bib%20fields#AmbiguousCoding
>
> ---
> A. Soroka
> The University of Virginia Library
>
> On Aug 15, 2014, at 11:10 AM, Karen Coyle <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> On 8/15/14, 6:06 AM, Donald R. Thornbury wrote:
>>> I completely agree.  Place of publication is a relationship of the publisher entity.
>> It would be nice to investigate that "fact" -- with a few searches, here's what I find:
>>
>> 260	__	  |a Oxford :  |b Clarendon Press ;  |a New York :  |b Oxford University Press,  |c 1990.
>> -> Clarendon press is in Oxford; Oxford University Press is in New York.
>>
>> 260	__	  |a London ;  |a New York :  |b Oxford University Press,  |c 1985.
>> -> Now OUP is in both London and New York
>>
>> 260	__	  |a New York,  |b H. Frowde, Oxford university press;  |c [1902?]
>> -> Now it's only in New York.
>>
>> 260	3_	  |3 2012- :  |a London :  |b Oxford University Press
>> -> Ooops, now it's in London!
>>
>> 260	__	  |a Toronto :  |b Oxford University Press,  |c <1983- >
>> -> Hey, and it's also moved to Toronto
>>
>> I'm sure if I keep looking I'll find one that places OUP in Oxford, but I haven't encountered one yet.
>>
>> It seems that the "publisher entity" can "publish" in various places, which would make place an attribute of the publishing event, not of the publisher.
>>
>> My take: it's one thing to try to keep track of the "headquarters" of a publishing house, although those can also change. But that is not going to coincide at all times with the title page. We could consider them different pieces of information, but then I have to ask: What is the purpose of recording the place of publication? There is the transcription role; then there is the possibility of doing some statistical analysis on publication and publication rates based on times and places. Monitoring the development and movement of publishing houses seems to be a different goal than the bibliographic one that we generally take on in libraries.
>>
>> kc
>>>   This bit of discussion is going over ground covered in FRBR 4.1:
>>> "For example, "place of publication/distribution" is defined as an attribute of the manifestation to reflect the statement appearing in the manifestation itself that indicates where it was published. Inasmuch as the model also defines place as an entity it would have been possible to define an additional relationship linking the entity place either directly to the manifestation or indirectly through the entities person and corporate body which in turn are linked through the production relationship to the manifestation. To produce a fully developed data model further definition of that kind would be appropriate."
>>> It's now time to develop the data model so it's not so string-y. Displays and user access to "authority" data can be configured to as to provide all relevant information.
>>> We should note that place of publication is not specified as a criterion for distinguishing monograph manifestations, per RDA LC-PCC PS for 2.1, and that in Table 6.3 FRBR has Place of publication/distribution as a low-value attribute for identifying manifestations.  Transcribing place names as attributes a zillion times isn't worth the effort when we have a more efficient way to handle data.
>>>
>>> Don Thornbury
>>>
>>> Donald R. Thornbury
>>> Head, Technical Services for Special Collections
>>> Department of Rare Books and Special Collections
>>> Princeton University Library
>>> One Washington Road
>>> Princeton, NJ 08544-2098
>>> Office: 609.258.0874
>>> Fax: 609.258.2324
>>>    
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum [
>>> mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of [log in to unmask]
>>>
>>> Sent: Friday, August 15, 2014 8:21 AM
>>> To:
>>> [log in to unmask]
>>>
>>> Subject: Re: [BIBFRAME] Proposal to handle "Providers" differently
>>>
>>> Rather than reproducing the labels of a entity (e.g. place of publication) in several places for our own technical convenience, we can supply them on the entity (the authority data) and either by indexing ahead of time or by on-demand retrieval, we can use them for display at the appropriate time (during the patron's session).
>>>
>>> Patrons can certainly have access to authority "records". In fact, one could say that this is essential to doing good Linked Data.
>>>
>>> ---
>>> A. Soroka
>>> The University of Virginia Library
>>>
>>> On Aug 14, 2014, at 8:56 PM, "J. McRee Elrod"
>>> <[log in to unmask]>
>>>   wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>> If we have a pointer fully-populated authority control record for
>>>>> publisher, adding location of publication is redundant at best and misleading at worst.
>>>>>
>>>> Patrons rarely have access to authority records.  The brief display
>>>> should contain the place and jurisdictiion of publication, jurisdiction supplied if not in the resource.
>>>>
>>>> That is basic information, and often a clue to the viewpoint of a resource.
>>>>
>>>> We are working for patrons, not each other!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>    __       __   J. McRee (Mac) Elrod (
>>>> [log in to unmask]
>>>> )
>>>>   {__  |   /     Special Libraries Cataloguing
>>>> HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
>>>>
>>>>   ___} |__ \__________________________________________________________
>>>>
>> -- 
>> Karen Coyle
>>
>> [log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net
>>
>> m: +1-510-435-8234
>> skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600
>>

-- 
Karen Coyle
[log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net
m: +1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600

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

October 2018
September 2018
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