Shouldn't we be creating data for both humans and machines?


Cindy Wolff




From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Karen Coyle
Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2014 3:08 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [BIBFRAME] 7XX fields without relator terms


It's important for ALL creative works. That's why it's too bad that the data
only separates between "main entry" and "other" without further distinction.
But without some role coding, all you can know, from a machine
interpretation point of view, is "main/other." Oh, and most of the time we
don't even know the role of the main entry, because "main entry" isn't a
creative role.

Take this as a lesson of the difference between creating data for humans,
and creating data for machines. We're still doing the former. Should we
continue to do so?


On 10/22/14 10:42 AM, Gordon, Bruce J. wrote:

For sound and audiovisual items the distinction between contributor and
creator is important. 




Bruce J. Gordon

Audio Engineer

Audio Preservation Services - a shared service of the Harvard Library

Harvard University

Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138


tel. +1(617) 495-1241

fax +1(617) 496-4636


On Oct 22, 2014, at 1:19 PM, J. McRee Elrod <[log in to unmask]> wrote:


Joe said:

The LC conversion uses bf:contributor as a default when there is no explicit

role.  The problem is that entities named in 7XXs may be contributors, but 
others may be creators ...

I doubt if patrons know or care about a distinction between "contributor"
and" creator"; "agent" introduces a third term not in present rules.

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


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