Print

Print


And, we need to distinguish electronic versions, in order to get them 
properly accessed. There are publisher versions ("e-book", "e-journal"), 
and surrogates, derived from print (or other) editions for distribution 
or preservation, made available by library services. There are quality 
levels of the electronic reproduction patrons ask for (high resolution, 
colors, "not the Google crap"). Just like there are master microforms 
for secondary editions, it is useful to distinguish electronic versions.

I work on a bibliographic item RDF ontology where I have modeled this 
with service classes. For example, there is an AccessService class, 
which may be attributed by additional time period, concurrent number, 
and cost restrictions according to publisher licensing. More info soon.

Jörg

Am 18.05.13 00:14, schrieb J. McRee Elrod:
> Kevin said:
>
>> Do I think displays should find a graceful way to deal with such a
>> skimpy Instance?  Absolutely.
> To repeat, we don't need or want more than one instance/display for
> items printed or digitalized from the same type image, and from the
> same publisher, regardless of how many ISBNs have been assigned by
> that publisher; there should be one for the print and another for the
> electronic version.  (Unfortunately, some legacy records combine the
> two, particularly for serials.)
>
> There are also records (as the result of an LCRI) which have the
> print description for the electronic or micro version, with the
> electronic or micro data in 533.
>
>
>
>
>     __       __   J. McRee (Mac) Elrod ([log in to unmask])
>    {__  |   /     Special Libraries Cataloguing   HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
>    ___} |__ \__________________________________________________________