Print

Print


Jeff, while the URI may identify the book, it is also the only Web hook 
for the retrieval of the bibliographic record, unless you intend to 
create a second URI for the record. The LC "permalink" (and I believe 
OCLC's similar one) is a permanent link back to that record in the 
database. The record is also a "thing".

If you wish to define the LC or OCLC URI as "thing" identifiers, then 
you (and we all) have to understand that it identifies what library 
cataloging rules decided was a "thing." That could be a monographic 
series, or a monograph in the series; a box in an archive, contents 
undescribed; or, in the case we are discussing here, multiple bindings 
of the same text. The caution here is that the library "thing" and 
someone else's determination of "thing" (e.g. publishers) will differ, 
and we should be careful not to declare ours as more than the library 
view of the world. We are not the world, and will have to be able to 
bend our view in order to meet that of others.

kc


On 1/24/13 2:38 PM, Young,Jeff (OR) wrote:
> In the old days, LCCNs were "card numbers". When the machines came, they
> got upgraded to "control numbers". When Linked Data came around, they
> got upgraded to "concept numbers".
>
> <id.loc.gov/authorities/names/n88055112> identifies a concept.
> Likewise,
> <http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/136259> identifies a book.
>
> String identifiers are buggy whips.
>
> Jeff
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum
>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Stephen Hearn
>> Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2013 3:25 PM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: [BIBFRAME] Bibframe and translations from MARC
>>
>> 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

-- 
Karen Coyle
[log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net
ph: 1-510-540-7596
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet