 |
 |
Nate, that is what I assumed, and thanks for confirming that. I still think we might find some "office pools" arising on likely next candidates . Or maybe it would be more amusing to see who could come up with the most unusual, but necessary, bibliographic subtype. There are catalogers who have seen things that most of us couldn't even imagine. If ever there was a "cataloger cocktail party" this would be a great game for it. kc On 1/29/13 6:45 AM, Trail, Nate wrote: > Karen, we're just getting started defining subtypes; Dissertation was just the first one we started trying to model, realizing that it had properties not likely to belong to any other "type" of Work. We can see that there may be lots of them, but agreeing on them will take some work. > > Nate > > --------------------------------------------------------------- > Nate Trail > --------------------------------------------------------------- > Network Development and MARC Standards Office > Technology Policy Mail stop 4402 > Library Services > Library of Congress > 202-707-2193 > [log in to unmask] > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Karen Coyle > Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 9:24 PM > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Re: [BIBFRAME] LC's BIBFRAME vocabulary > > The dissertation type is interesting, thanks, Jason. It basically takes what WAS a note that essentially changed the meaning of the entire record and makes dissertation a type of resource. [1] That is great to see. I note that there are two "sub-types" under Work [2]: dissertation and cartographic. I would have bet that music would end up there, but it isn't. Not to mention serials and seriality. We can take bets on which types move out of Work and become subtypes :-). And I can see what you mean about scaling. > > kc > > [1] I also was wrong about their not being a fixed field: there is a code for theses. I believe the difficulty in my institution was that the code was filled in less often than the note was created. Probably not uncommon. > [2] http://bibframe.org/vocab/Work.html (scroll to bottom) > > On 1/28/13 10:37 AM, Jason Ronallo wrote: >> On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Karen Coyle <[log in to unmask]> wrote: >>> As an example, one field that I would greatly miss is the 502 >>> Dissertation Note. Unless things have changed since I was still >>> processing MARC records, the presence of this note is the only way to >>> know that what you have is a dissertation. Obviously folks in >>> academic libraries would want to be able to limit some searches to >>> dissertations. (I'd be happy for "dissertation" to be a value >>> somewhere in the future record -- although we'd still need the >>> information that is in the note, and it might need some special >>> treatment.) >> It appears that Dissertation will be handled through its own type: >> http://bibframe.org/vocab/Dissertation.html >> Is this a pattern which is likely to repeat? I wonder if this approach >> will run into some of the same scaling issues of Schema.org and >> require some sort of external enumeration or additionalType property >> to accommodate all the different types of things collected. >> >> Jason > -- > Karen Coyle > [log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net > ph: 1-510-540-7596 > m: 1-510-435-8234 > skype: kcoylenet -- Karen Coyle [log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net ph: 1-510-540-7596 m: 1-510-435-8234 skype: kcoylenet