I agree with Nancy.  It would be much better to use the vocabulary specifically intended for genre/form access and use http://id.loc.gov/authorities/genreForms/gf2014026481 as the example.  


Adam L. Schiff
Principal Cataloger
University of Washington Libraries
Box 352900
Seattle, WA 98195-2900

On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 2:50 PM -0800, "Denenberg, Ray" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

Nancy - I take your point, but strictly speaking, If you dereference the URI:
(and note that the example has a slight error, the .html should have been omitted)
and get RDF returned:

note that it is a madsrdf:GenreForm.   (As opposed to a madsrdf:Topic. MADS doesn't know about subjects  --topics, but not subjects).

Granted, the URI:
makes it seem to be a subject. 


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Nancy Lorimer
> Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2015 6:18 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: [BIBFRAME] Categories--Genre/Form
> A short comment on Example 4 of Categories.
> It would make more sense here to use the URI for the genre/form term from
> LCGFT (the genre/form thesaurus), rather than the subject heading URL from
> Nancy
> --
> Nancy Lorimer
> Head, Metadata Dept
> Stanford University Libraries
> [log in to unmask]
> 650-725-8819