[open-bibliography] OKFN blog: Bibliographica, an Introduction

• Previous message: [open-bibliography] OKFN blog: Bibliographica, an Introduction
• Next message: [open-bibliography] OKFN blog: Bibliographica, an Introduction
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On 5/25/10 8:40 AM, Ross Singer wrote:
>
> Actually, if this is what Jon said, I hate to say it, but Jon's wrong 
> (or this is being taken out of context).
You should definitely get Jon's explanation... I won't claim to have 
conveyed it accurately.

>
>
> I guess my question at this point becomes, do we wring our hands and 
> worry over the minutiae of making sure our horribly imperfect data 
> maps perfectly to a theoretical, platonic ideal of what library data 
> should be or can we just assume some fuzziness with the legacy data 
> and start building things the best we can (without the architectural 
> astronautics) with the stuff we've got now?  Is anybody really going 
> to care, in the end, if the subjects have been asserted against what 
> is really a manifestation?
>

That's what the "general" attributes are for at the RDA registry. So you 
can grab properties from there without having them balled up with the 
WEMI entities. But in that case, it's best not to claim that your 
record/data represents a particular FRBR entity... it's best to ignore 
FRBR altogether, as most people do (and get along just fine without it).

kc

-- 
Karen Coyle
kcoyle at kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
ph: 1-510-540-7596
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-bibliography/attachments/20100525/3d323c6d/attachment-0001.html>

• Previous message: [open-bibliography] OKFN blog: Bibliographica, an Introduction
• Next message: [open-bibliography] OKFN blog: Bibliographica, an Introduction
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]