<[log in to unmask]>
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Lines: 23
X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4wfHj/D0ijSRjqMhfnRfHPxOP4EIT29S9I79HgggefhoFeI8G+jNkUSXsW+A6vWSmJ5JlvCKJ/HzJo+DKMS6qajyiMhI2zzO7M6GEiES5IPwfAXpiDDyPS

>Doesn't a FRBR notion of "item" depend on the possibility of someone
>in history saying "ouch" when that physical material drops on their

While SLC catalogues e-books which have a print version, much of SLC's
work today is creating MARC records for digital items which never had,
nor will ever have, a physical form which could be dropped on one's

Some seem to feel that the physical precedes the digital.  That is
often not the case.  Most thesis begin as digital, and the print-out
is from that electronic form.  Rip-off publishers are now issuing
Wikipedia articles in print form.  In both these cases, the digital
proceeded the print.

If  FRBR "item" assumes a physical form, it is *way* out of date.

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