Print

Print


This is a note on the attempts to treat "publisher" as a corporate body 
rather than or in addition to a transcribed string -- what is 
transcribed may not represent a corporation but an imprint -- which is 
essentially a product line. (Think "iPod" vs. "Apple".) As an example, 
Vintage Books [1] was an imprint of Knopf but now is an imprint of 
Random House. It has, to my knowledge, never been a corporate entity on 
its own. This is an issue that will be devilish to solve, something 
along the lines of title changes in serial publications, and perhaps one 
that should be deferred at the moment? (Note that there are times when 
the publisher prefix of the ISBN is a better indicator of a corporate 
body than the title page, but, oh boy, the vagaries around ISBN use are 
a whole 'nother complication!)

kc
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vintage_Books

On 5/10/13 2:38 PM, McCallum, Sally wrote:
>
> Here is another part of the BIBFRAME pie to stimulate discussion and 
> questions for the community to consider, _On BIBFRAME Authority_.  
> This issue paper concerns the Authorities concept in the BIBFRAME 
> model paper.  This paper clarifies what the model document says about 
> the Authority part of the model and invites discussion.
>
> http://bibframe.org/documentation/bibframe-authority/
>
> Again it is helpful if when discussing this paper, you name your 
> listserv comment with the topic  plus  an extra title to bind threads, 
> e.g., "authority--main point".
>
> Looking forward to your comments,  Sally
>
> **************************
>
> Sally H. McCallum
>
> Chief, Network Development and Standards Office
>
> Library of Congress,  101 Independence Ave., SE
>
> Washington, DC 20540  USA
>
> [log in to unmask]
>
> Tel. 1-202-707-5119 -- Fax 1-202-707-0115
>
> **************************
>

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