 |
 |
Quoting Simon Spero <[log in to unmask]>: > I'm not sure that this usage of provenance is strictly correct. The title > on the title page and the title on the cover are two different pieces of > information; they can have different values but still have identical > provenance. > > The reason for not collapsing differentiating the two pieces of information > is not primarily for user display (although collapsing the distinction may > lead to interruptions in sequential displays); the main reason for keeping > the two properties distinct is that they serve as identity criteria. An interesting case in point: publisher records that I've seen often use the cover title for identification, since that is the title that items will be logically filed by in a bookstore, it being the visible title. kc > This > is the case whether applying absolute identity (classical Leibniz's Law), > relative identity (RLL), or when using probabilistic record linkage (e.g. > Felligi/Sunter). > > I am not sure of the strength of this effect on F/S using maximum entropy > weightings; if you could run the numbers for worldcat would be very useful. > > BTW, a useful methodological approach to these questions might be useful > to measure the effect of different proposed rule changes using this kind of > metric. This is also a case where using quantitative models of user > information seeking behavior could be effective in selecting which possible > models and rules are worth testing with real users. Since a lot of the > data fields in MARC are not independent, using information theoretic models > to select hypotheses may be essential for cost reasons,. > -- Karen Coyle [log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net ph: 1-510-540-7596 m: 1-510-435-8234 skype: kcoylenet