Print

Print


I think Kevin Ford is referring to a case of distinction without a
difference rather than uncertain sameness. The point is not that the
paperback and the hardcover are the same, but that their differences
don't require separate descriptive records in the catalog. The
cataloged entity includes both, despite their differences.

To reorient Kevin's example, suppose after a catalog record with LCCN
is created, a publisher creates separate records identified by ISBN
for the hardcover and the paperback. Having the LCCN on both of the
publisher's records would mean that both could be retrieved by LCCN,
and both could provide supplemental data to the LCCN description. So
my answer to Kevin's question would be "both, in order to enable more
comprehensive data gathering about aspects of the entity described by
the LCCN."

Stephen

On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 1:48 PM, Young,Jeff (OR) <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> I've found umbel:isLike to be handy property for situations like these.
> Here's the definition:
>
> The property umbel:isLike is used to assert an associative link between
> similar individuals who may or may not be identical, but are believed to be
> so. This property is not intended as a general expression of similarity, but
> rather the likely but uncertain same identity of the two resources being
> related.
>
> This property can and should be changed if the certainty of the sameness of
> identity is subsequently determined.
>
> In general, we may not be able to assert that two individuals are the same
> based solely on current information on hand. However, there may be quite
> reasonable bases or methods that the two individuals are likely the same
> without being one hundred percent sure.
>
> umbel:isLike has the semantics of likely identity, but where there is some
> uncertainty that the two resources indeed refer to the exact same individual
> with the same identity. Such uncertainty can arise when, for example, common
> names may be used for different individuals (e.g., John Smith).
>
> It is appropriate to use this property when there is strong belief the two
> resources refer to the same individual with the same identity, but that
> association can not be asserted at the present time with certitude.
>
> Jeff
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>
>> From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum
>
>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ford, Kevin
>
>> Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2013 2:23 PM
>
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>
>> Subject: Re: [BIBFRAME] Bibframe and translations from MARC
>
>>
>
>> > 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.
>
>> -- Let's say, for the sake of argument, that there are two ISBNs in one
>
>> bib record.  One for the hardback, the other is for the paperback.  Of
>
>> course, there is one LCCN in the 010.
>
>>
>
>> If ISBNs are used as "splitting" points - meaning that two BIBFRAME
>
>> Instances would be created from the one MARC bib record in the above
>
>> example - where does the LCCN go?  Neither Instance? The first Instance
>
>> created from splitting the ISBNs from the 020? Both Instances?
>
>>
>
>> If the answer is neither or both, what is the role of the LCCN (or
>
>> another traditional description identifier, such as an OCLC number) in
>
>> the new ecosystem?
>
>>
>
>> Cordially,
>
>> Kevin
>
>>
>
>>
>
>> > -----Original Message-----
>
>> > From: J. McRee Elrod [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
>
>> > Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2013 12:40 PM
>
>> > To: Ford, Kevin
>
>> > Cc: [log in to unmask]
>
>> > Subject: Re: [BIBFRAME] Bibframe and translations from MARC
>
>> >
>
>> > Kevin quoted:
>
>> >
>
>> > >> Is there a theory beyond the mappings? In this example
>
>> > >> (http://kcoyle.net/bibframe/BFbook.html), 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://www.slc.bc.ca/
>
>> >   ___} |__
>
>> \__________________________________________________________
>
>> >
>
>> >



-- 
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