On 4/30/07, Jonathan Rochkind <rochkind_at_jhu.edu> wrote:
> But I think there are technical methods for sharing just parts of FRBR
> entity instances too, that could be very useful and shouldn't be written
> off without consideration.
>
Exactly. For instance, there's a strong case that could be made that
"names" or "publishers" or any variety of data that we currently keep
in one record (and duplicate repeatedly, entering more and more
possibilities for errors) could be distributed among several records:
an entity record, a biographical record (for the author or subject,
say), one or more geographical records (for publisher place or
subject, perhaps) and the entity record merely links to the others or
those records link to other records, etc.
I think this is an incredibly important consideration given the
interconnectedness of our data.
-Ross.
Received on Mon Apr 30 2007 - 07:58:26 EDT