Print

Print


I appreciate this analysis of our current predicament.  Karen's conclusion indicates that we'd benefit by focusing on "services we want the work to provide in the future" and I agree wholeheartedly.

From my perspective—at a public library where customer demand frequently prompts us to acquire a single popular title in five formats (print, large-type, ebook, cd-book, and eaudio)—one helpful service would be to synchronize series and subject access points.  The same could apply to cast and crew for DVD and Blu-Ray versions of a single movie.  In terms of Karen's outline, I see this as closing the gap between "work description" and "work entity" as much as possible.

Regards,
David

David Pimentel ~ Senior Cataloging and Metadata Librarian
Denver Public Library ~ 720.865.1123

On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 8:08 AM, Karen Coyle <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
All,

Due to having been on some committees that were tasked with attempting
to define "the work" I have some thoughts on that topic which I wrote up
as a blog post:

http://kcoyle.blogspot.com/2017/07/the-work.html

In summary, I define four different meanings/aspects:

* Work-ness - a general sense that there are works inherent in creation
* work-description - what library cataloging does to describe works
* work decision - creating an authoritative identity for the work in the
form of a author/uniform title/edition heading
* work entity - the data thing defined in FRBRer, BIBFRAME, RDA/RDF as
"the work"

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