Compare the definitions for Collection, Set , and Group (and possibly Mob).
I'd like to support Casey's point about whole-part relationships not being all of one kind. In the dim mists of the past, MARBI was considering a proposal to support the creation of relationships between separate items that had been bound together and so necessarily shared a barcode. (I think this was it: http://www.loc.gov/marc/marbi/1999/99-02.html). It's interesting how similar the discussion seems to be to some of the FRBR relationship discussions.In any case, the discussion of the proposal ultimately came down to the differences between bibliographic relationships (between editions, for instance) and physical relationships (items bound and circulated together, sometimes for obvious reasons--issues of a serial--or for reasons unclear but relating to practices a century or so ago). I was dealing with miscellaneous collections of pamphlets bound together at the time, so the problem was not abstract from my point of view.As I recall, the much-to-simple solution proposed originally by a vendor were not accepted, largely because of the discussion at the meeting. Although these situations seem so rare that they should not interfere with our quest for simplicity, in fact they are often cases that can teach us quite a bit about the limits of simplification in whatever model of the world we're looking at.DianeOn Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 7:59 PM, Kevin M Randall <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Simon Spero wrote:Wow, this is like working on the MENSA quiz in the airline magazine on the way to an ALA conference! ;)
> (1) Everything which is eaten by something is a food.
> (2) Everything that a carnivore eats is an animal. Everything that
> eats an animal is a carnivore.
> (3) Everything that a herbivore eats is a plant. Everything that eats
> a plant is a herbivore.
> (4) Every fly is an animal. Every antelope is an animal. Every flytrap
> is a plant.
> (5) Fred is a fly. Audrey is a flytrap. Ann is an antelope. Noel is a
> grass. Agatha is an antelope.
> (6) Audrey eats Fred. Ann eats Audrey. Ann eats Noel.
> Let's think about how this can be translated to OWL, then consider what
> other sentences are entailed.
Kevin M. Randall
Principal Serials Cataloger
Northwestern University Library
[log in to unmask]
Proudly wearing the sensible shoes since 1978!