Print :
2.2 Annotations are Extrinsic
The information asserted by an Annotation is  generally extrinsic to its Target.
           There is info about the item that is annotational, (signed, dog-eared) but to me until one has an item, be it an actual Web page or a copy of a book, the Work and Instance are only conceptual. Because an item may be annotated does not make it an annotation itself. We catalogers are taught to catalog what we have "in hand" and we can't hold (or view) a work or an instance unless it is embodied in an item, thus the term holding. That is hardly extrinsic is it?
           I understand that annotations are important but for the most part they are optional. The items are not optional.  If you have only a work and an instance you've got nothing. You may have a "bib" record but that is only a representation of an idea and unless you created that record from an item in hand it is not only nothing but it is also speculative nothing as embodied in our CIP records.
           I don't intend to belabor the point though.
Michael Mitchell

From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ford, Kevin
Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2013 1:57 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [BIBFRAME] BIBFRAME Annotation Model Draft 2

Dear Michael,

A BIBFRAME Annotation is a different type of resource than a BIBFRAME Work or BIBFRAME Instance resource.  It is no less important (or more important) than a Work or Instance.  An annotation resource is designed, in part, to accommodate institution specific information [1].   The Annotation component of the model reflects a pattern of description that captures information about who made the assertion ("Library A states it has a copy of Book Y signed by the author.").  And a Holding, unlike a Work or Instance resource, is specific to an institution.   It may have a call number that is specific to the institution, copy notes that are specific ("Signed by author"; "copy has ms. notes by author on endpapers"), etc.

I see a Holding as essential to fully describing an institution's copy of something.  To that end, all three types of resources - Work, Instance, Holding - will be necessary and related to each other (or at least I expect so 99% of the time).  The Holding, in turn, will relate to an Instance, which will relate to a Work.

Does that help?  I received the impression that you were viewing an Annotation as some kind of second-class resource to BIBFRAME Works and Instances.  That's not the case at all.  Is it different? Yes.   Any less  important? No.





Kevin Ford

Network Development and MARC Standards Office

Library of Congress

Washington, DC

From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Mitchell, Michael
Sent: Monday, August 26, 2013 6:04 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [BIBFRAME] BIBFRAME Annotation Model Draft 2

           OK. I have great trouble equating a "holding" to an annotation. A holding is an integral part of an instance and a work. Cover art, descriptions, and reviews really aren't integral, they are extra. You can refer to several million bib records in LC to see this as you are unlikely to find any without holdings but millions without the other annotations.
           To take this a step further, as I see it, a work really can't exist, except in the mind of the creator, without an instance, even if that is only the author's manuscript, and an instance really can't exist without an item or holding, again, even if only the handwritten manuscript. I really can't practically get to a work without working backward from an item to an instance to a work. Anything else is vaporware. I can't get into the mind of the creator until the work is recorded in some way, once that work is recorded there is an instance and unless I can have that instance in my possession, as an item, I can't catalog the work or instance. The three forms are integral.
           I don't see that holdings are any more annotation that instances. Items should be core resources, not annotations, in my humble opinion.

Michael Mitchell
Technical Services Librarian
Brazosport College
Lake Jackson, TX
Michael.mitchell at

From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Denenberg, Ray
Sent: Monday, August 26, 2013 1:44 PM
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: [BIBFRAME] BIBFRAME Annotation Model Draft 2

BIBFRAME Annotation Model -
BIBFRAME Community Draft, 26 August 2013 (second draft)<>
As with the previous draft (April 30) this is a work in progress, comments and discussion encouraged.
Thanks to the BIBFRAME community, including the Early Experimenters, for the many comments and suggestions, which have resulted in what we think is a significantly improved document.
Ray Denenberg
Library of Congress