> Two nit-picky points, and then an answer to your question:
> 1. A manifestation actually cannot contain an expression.  An 
> expression is a realization of a work; a manifestation 
> embodies that particular expression.  So, by my reading, the 
> expression-to-manifestation link is one-to-many.  An 
> expression can have several different manifestations, but any 
> particular manifestation is the embodiment of only one expression.
> 2. Thus, to my mind, a CD containing multiple tracks isn't a 
> case of a manifestation (the CD) containing expressions; it's 
> a set of manifestations gathered together in single physical 
> package, which might or not count as a manifestation, 
> depending on your point of view.

The FRBR report itself may not do a good job explaining the relationship
between Manifestation and Expression - certainly it's a topic of much
discussion. But I do think the intention is to have a many to many
relationship between Expression and Manifestation. The diagram on p. 13
(printed p. 13, p. 21 of the PDF file at
<>) shows a double arrow at
both sides of the link between Expression and Manifestation, indicating
a many to many relationship. The text on this page similarly says "An
expression may be embodied in one or more than one manifestation;
likewise a manifestation may embody one or more than one expression."
The Manifestation is described (see, for example p. 20/p. 28 in PDF) as
the physical item itself, not an intellectual thing on the physical
item. So the CD as the physical item has to be the Manifestation,
embodying more than one Expression.

> That being said, there's nothing very difficult about having 
> a single manifestation that is included in more than one 
> higher-level manifestation.  Again, the solution is the 
> <mptr> facility.  Create a METS object for the individual track.
>   A METS object
> for the CD can then use <mptr> to link to the track; a 
> different METS (a FRBR representation for larger piece that 
> that track comes from?) could also point to the same track 
> METS file via an mptr.

Yep, this makes sense, thanks! In the first model you presented in your
original response, with separate METS documents for each entity, I can
now see it would be easy to point multiple Expression documents to the
same Manifestation document. But could one do this within a single METS
document, and a single structMap? 


Jenn Riley
Metadata Librarian
Digital Library Program
Indiana University - Bloomington
Main Library E170
(812) 856-5759

Inquiring Librarian blog: