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  June 2015

BIBFRAME June 2015

Subject:

Display

From:

"J. McRee Elrod" <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

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

Date:

Mon, 15 Jun 2015 09:56:15 -0700

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (41 lines)

Presumably the end product of Bibframe (as for any coding system)
would be display of a bibliographic description to lead a patron to a
resource, regardless of any other use made of the data.

I've seen little if any discussion of display or indexing.

For example, in the labeling of variant titles, does that variant
title produce a note or only serve as an access point?  Some should
display (e.g. spine title), and some need not (e.g., a distinctive
subtitle need not mislay twice).  Would the subtitle label have an
indication that it should be a access point, or would it be entered
twice as now?  Or would all subtitles be access points regardless of
need?

Karen said that in the world of liked data, there would be no "record"
having, for example, note order.  But there would be a display, and
that display should not have random note order.  How is a consistent
order to be accomplished, if most notes are just <bf:note>?

In Bibframe examples, tags are given in ISBD order, apart from variant
titles which are given in MARC order.  How does this appear on an OPAC
screen?  Those Bibframe labels would be nonsense to patrons, and the
capitalization is strange to say the least.  Are we expecting a simple
ISBD display (ala Martha Yee*), or the substitution of more patron
friendly terms in the "languge of the catalogue"?  Would there be
standardization of labels, for skill transfer from OPAC to OPAC, or
the congising mix we now have?

MARC's greatest weakness is the failure of ILS to fully exploit it.  
How Bibframe would be utilized for patron service seems paramount to
me.

*http://slc.bc.ca/yee.pdf




   __       __   J. McRee (Mac) Elrod ([log in to unmask])
  {__  |   /     Special Libraries Cataloguing   HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
  ___} |__ \__________________________________________________________

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

May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
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