In a NISO webinar Wednesday Eric Miller suggested that there would
need to be an RDA profile built on top of Bibframe before many of the
RDA questions could be addressed. This leads me to wonder if we should
be thinking of Bibframe as an alternative to ANSI Z39.2 and not really
to MARC 21. The work of building an RDA profile for Bibframe could be
taken up by the new ALA metadata committee that will replace MARBI

That said, I agree with Kelley that Bibframe needs to get the basic
relationships right. Even at the Bibframe level, the relationship
between Work and Instance will need to be more complex than one-to-one
only. That should be something profiles built on Bibframe can
determine, based on how they specify different kinds of work and
different kinds of instance.


On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 11:40 AM, J. McRee Elrod <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Kevin quoted:
>>> Is there a theory beyond the mappings? In this example
>>> (, the LCCN is mapped to the
>>> work ...
> It would seem clear to me that 010 LCCN, 020 ISBN, 022 ISSN, and all
> standard numbers including 016 LAC #, relate to the manifestation (aka
> instance), not the work.
> I too am concerned by the omissions and mapping.  The bibliographic
> universe is far more complex than Bibframe to date seems to assume.
>    __       __   J. McRee (Mac) Elrod ([log in to unmask])
>   {__  |   /     Special Libraries Cataloguing   HTTP://
>   ___} |__ \__________________________________________________________

Stephen Hearn, Metadata Strategist
Technical Services, University Libraries
University of Minnesota
160 Wilson Library
309 19th Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55455
Ph: 612-625-2328
Fx: 612-625-3428