Print

Print


Graham, thanks for the info. I'm going to add indecs to the PCC document
on works, and may send you additional questions (offlist).

kc



On 1/25/17 11:54 AM, Graham Bell wrote:
> No, it is the same as in the library world. Paperback, hardcover and
> Ebooks are different manifestations of the same work. They all get
> different manifestation identifiers (ISBNs) but they would in
> principle carry the same work ID (an ISTC, if anyone implemented it).
> You only create a new work if there is significant adaptation of the
> content - revision, abridgement, translation etc.
>
> Manifestations and items in indecs and frbr are essentially identical,
> and work in indecs is roughly equivalent to a frbr expression.
>
> Graham
>
> Graham Bell
> EDItEUR
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On 25 Jan 2017, at 16:28, Karen Coyle <[log in to unmask]
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>
>> Graham, out of curiosity, what is the status of a hard copy book vs.
>> a paperback of the same text? It looks like they would be separate
>> works, based on your chart. If so, that is a different approach from
>> the library world, where the content, not the container, determines
>> the work, and even the expression (and in current data, even the
>> manifestation).
>>
>> kc
>>
>>
>>
>> On 1/25/17 1:35 AM, Graham Bell wrote:
>>> This is interesting, in that it aligns BIBFRAME more closely with
>>> the <indecs <http://www.doi.org/factsheets/indecs_factsheet.html>>
>>> conceptual model often used in the commercial world.
>>>
>>> In contrast to FRBR, <indecs> tends to model publications with three
>>> entities, abstraction, manifestation and item, rather than the
>>> well-known four part FRBR WEMI stack. In particular, see section /8.
>>> Creations/ in the <indecs> Principles, model and data dictionary
>>> <http://www.doi.org/topics/indecs/indecs_framework_2000.pdf> paper.
>>>  In essence, an indecs:abstraction is often called an indecs:work,
>>> and is very close to a frbr:expression, and a frbr:work is best
>>> understood in an <indecs> context as a network or directed graph of
>>> inter-related indecs:works. The relationships between indecs:works
>>> are events like translation, compilation, abridgement and so on.
>>> There are other events, like typesetting a book, recording an
>>> audiobook or a song, that relate works to their manifestations.
>>>
>>>     [NB there is often a terminological confusion here, because in
>>>     <indecs>, these events are called expressions.]
>>>
>>>
>>> So we have:
>>>
>>> ———————————————————————————————-
>>>
>>>    work
>>>      |
>>>  expression    ≈       work        (ISTC)
>>>      |                   |
>>> manifestation  =   manifestation   (ISBN)
>>>      |                   |
>>>    item        =       item
>>>
>>>        FRBR              <indecs>
>>>
>>> ———————————————————————————————-
>>>
>>> In <indecs>, works are often related to other works, and the
>>> relationships indicate a change in the underlying content. Somebody
>>> applies some intellectual effort to derive one work from another
>>> (e.g. translating it to create a second work, revising it to create
>>> a second edition, abridging it, adding illustrations to create an
>>> illustrated edition, adapting it to create a play, compiling
>>> separate poems or short stories into an anthology /etc/). The IP
>>> encompassed in the work is modified because someone does some /work/
>>> on it. And because the relationships are a directed graph, you can
>>> tell the difference between a translation of an abridgement and an
>>> abridgement of a translation. Of course, somewhere in the graph of
>>> works is ‘the original’ which is not derived from any other work, a
>>> kind of 'ur-work' on which the others are all directly or indirectly
>>> based – /Män som hattar kvinnor/ in a graph that also contains /The
>>> girl with the dragon tattoo, Les Hommes qui n'aimaient pas les
>>> femmes /and /Verblendung – /but they are a group of related peers,
>>> rather than the ur-work having any special position in the graph.
>>>
>>>
>>> In practical terms, <indecs> is used as the underlying basis for
>>> metadata standards like ONIX (books, e-books), EIDR (films and TV),
>>> DDEX (recorded music), and for the DOI framework and the ISTC
>>> identifier.
>>>
>>>
>>> Graham
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Graham Bell
>>> Executive Director, EDItEUR
>>>
>>>
>>> Tel: +44 20 7503 6418
>>>
>>>
>>> The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and may be
>>> privileged. It is intended for the addressee only. If you are not
>>> the intended recipient, please inform the sender and delete this
>>> e-mail immediately. The contents of this e-mail must not be
>>> disclosed or copied without the sender's consent. We cannot
>>> accept any responsibility for viruses, so please scan all
>>> attachments. The statements and opinions expressed in this
>>> message are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those
>>> of the company.
>>>
>>> EDItEUR Limited is a company limited by guarantee, registered in
>>> England no 2994705. Registered Office: United House, North Road,
>>> London N7 9DP, UK. Website: http://www.editeur.org
>>>
>>>
>>>> On 24 Jan 2017, at 15:22, Denenberg, Ray <[log in to unmask]
>>>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The question, I think, comes down to this:  If there is a Work, in
>>>> a given language – English for example -   and that work gets
>>>> translated into a different language – French, for example;  are
>>>> the English and French versions a single Work or separate Works. 
>>>> (Is this a reasonable reformulation of the question?) 
>>>>
>>>>  
>>>>
>>>> They are two different Works. They can be related to each another
>>>> via property bf:hasTranslation, and its inverse,
>>>> bf:translationOf.   So for example English is the original language
>>>> of Guns of August and there is a French translation:
>>>>
>>>>   
>>>>
>>>>              <http://bibframe.example.org/work/gunsOfAugustEnglish>
>>>>
>>>>                              a                             bf:Work ;
>>>>
>>>>                             hasTranslation    
>>>>    <http://bibframe.example.org/work/gunsOfAugustFrench> .
>>>>
>>>>  
>>>>
>>>> and
>>>>
>>>>  
>>>>
>>>>       <http://bibframe.example.org/work/gunsOfAugustFrench>
>>>>
>>>>         a                             bf:Work ;
>>>>
>>>>       isTranslationOf    
>>>>    <http://bibframe.example.org/work/gunsOfAugustEnglish> .
>>>>
>>>>  
>>>>
>>>> I was hoping to come up with a real-life BIBFRAME example from our
>>>> conversion, but unfortunately this idea doesn’t work well based on
>>>> marc records, because although the marc record may tell you that
>>>> there is a French translation, it doesn’t tell you where it is, and
>>>> some sort of matching algorithm has to come into play.   We haven’t
>>>> quite gotten that far yet, which is why I cannot produce a real
>>>> example yet. 
>>>>
>>>>  
>>>>
>>>> However, as a placeholder, say you have the English (original) and
>>>> you simply want to express that there is a French translation (but
>>>> you don’t yet know where):
>>>>
>>>>  
>>>>
>>>>              <http://bibframe.example.org/work/gunsOfAugustEnglish>
>>>>
>>>>                              a                             bf:Work ;
>>>>
>>>>                             hasTranslation        [rdfs:label
>>>> “French translation”  ] .
>>>>
>>>>  
>>>>
>>>> Please note that I have only considered the simple case where there
>>>> is an original, and a translation of the original.   There are
>>>> possible complicating factors:  There may not be one single
>>>> “original” language; or there may be, but a particular translation
>>>> isn’t translated directly from the original but rather from an
>>>> intermediate translation.   I don’t have answers to these situations.
>>>>
>>>>  
>>>>
>>>>  
>>>>
>>>> Ray
>>>>
>>>>  
>>>>
>>>>  
>>>>
>>>> *From:*Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum
>>>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] *On Behalf Of
>>>> *[log in to unmask]
>>>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>>>> *Sent:* Monday, January 16, 2017 8:26 AM
>>>> *To:* [log in to unmask]
>>>> *Subject:* [BIBFRAME] Work record(s) that have Instances with more
>>>> than one language
>>>>
>>>>  
>>>>
>>>> Which of the following is valid (either, both…)?
>>>>
>>>> ·         If a Work has 2 Instances with different languages then
>>>> there can be one Work record with 2 Instances and both languages
>>>> should be in the Work record
>>>>
>>>> ·         If there are 2 Instances with different languages then
>>>> there must be 2 Work records each with one Instance.
>>>>
>>>>  
>>>>
>>>> Shlomo Sanders
>>>>
>>>> CTO
>>>>
>>>> Tel: +972-2-6499356
>>>>
>>>> Mobile: +972-54-5246298
>>>>
>>>> [log in to unmask]
>>>> <x-msg:[log in to unmask]>
>>>>
>>>> <image001.jpg> <http://www.exlibrisgroup.com/>
>>>> www.exlibrisgroup.com <http://www.exlibrisgroup.com/>
>>>>
>>>>  
>>>>
>>>>  
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Karen Coyle
>> [log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net
>> m: +1-510-435-8234
>> skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600

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