Print

Print


Karen, Oh the inconsistency of cataloging rules over the years. óCecilia

On Aug 15, 2014, at 11:10 AM, Karen Coyle <[log in to unmask]> wrote:


On 8/15/14, 6:06 AM, Donald R. Thornbury wrote:
[log in to unmask]" type="cite" style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;">
I completely agree.  Place of publication is a relationship of the publisher entity. 

It would be nice to investigate that "fact" -- with a few searches, here's what I find:

260__ |a Oxford :  |b Clarendon Press ;  |a New York :  |b Oxford University Press,  |c 1990.

-> Clarendon press is in Oxford; Oxford University Press is in New York. 

260__ |a London ;  |a New York :  |b Oxford University Press,  |c 1985.

-> Now OUP is in both London and New York

260__ |a New York,  |b H. Frowde, Oxford university press;  |c [1902?]

-> Now it's only in New York.

2603_ |3 2012- :  |a London :  |b Oxford University Press

-> Ooops, now it's in London!

260__ |a Toronto :  |b Oxford University Press,  |c <1983- >

-> Hey, and it's also moved to Toronto

I'm sure if I keep looking I'll find one that places OUP in Oxford, but I haven't encountered one yet.

It seems that the "publisher entity" can "publish" in various places, which would make place an attribute of the publishing event, not of the publisher.

My take: it's one thing to try to keep track of the "headquarters" of a publishing house, although those can also change. But that is not going to coincide at all times with the title page. We could consider them different pieces of information, but then I have to ask: What is the purpose of recording the place of publication? There is the transcription role; then there is the possibility of doing some statistical analysis on publication and publication rates based on times and places. Monitoring the development and movement of publishing houses seems to be a different goal than the bibliographic one that we generally take on in libraries. 

kc
[log in to unmask]" type="cite" style="font-family: Helvetica; font-size: 12px; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;">
 This bit of discussion is going over ground covered in FRBR 4.1:
"For example, "place of publication/distribution" is defined as an attribute of the manifestation to reflect the statement appearing in the manifestation itself that indicates where it was published. Inasmuch as the model also defines place as an entity it would have been possible to define an additional relationship linking the entity place either directly to the manifestation or indirectly through the entities person and corporate body which in turn are linked through the production relationship to the manifestation. To produce a fully developed data model further definition of that kind would be appropriate."
It's now time to develop the data model so it's not so string-y. Displays and user access to "authority" data can be configured to as to provide all relevant information.
We should note that place of publication is not specified as a criterion for distinguishing monograph manifestations, per RDA LC-PCC PS for 2.1, and that in Table 6.3 FRBR has Place of publication/distribution as a low-value attribute for identifying manifestations.  Transcribing place names as attributes a zillion times isn't worth the effort when we have a more efficient way to handle data.

Don Thornbury

Donald R. Thornbury 
Head, Technical Services for Special Collections 
Department of Rare Books and Special Collections 
Princeton University Library 
One Washington Road 
Princeton, NJ 08544-2098 
Office: 609.258.0874 
Fax: 609.258.2324 
  

-----Original Message-----
From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of [log in to unmask]
Sent: Friday, August 15, 2014 8:21 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [BIBFRAME] Proposal to handle "Providers" differently

Rather than reproducing the labels of a entity (e.g. place of publication) in several places for our own technical convenience, we can supply them on the entity (the authority data) and either by indexing ahead of time or by on-demand retrieval, we can use them for display at the appropriate time (during the patron's session).

Patrons can certainly have access to authority "records". In fact, one could say that this is essential to doing good Linked Data.

---
A. Soroka
The University of Virginia Library

On Aug 14, 2014, at 8:56 PM, "J. McRee Elrod" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

If we have a pointer fully-populated authority control record for 
publisher, adding location of publication is redundant at best and misleading at worst.
Patrons rarely have access to authority records.  The brief display 
should contain the place and jurisdictiion of publication, jurisdiction supplied if not in the resource.

That is basic information, and often a clue to the viewpoint of a resource.

We are working for patrons, not each other!


  __       __   J. McRee (Mac) Elrod ([log in to unmask])
 {__  |   /     Special Libraries Cataloguing   HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
 ___} |__ \__________________________________________________________

-- 
Karen Coyle
[log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net
m: +1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600