Owen Stevens wrote:
> However, perhaps this is the heart of it
> - we should be designing systems with data models that would let us
> output in a FRBRish way, but we don't need to design systems that model
> stuff in a FRBRish way.
and
> Is our primary aim to (a) present information in a FRBR type way, or to
> (b) catalogue things in a FRBR type way?
> If (a), is (b) a pre-requisite?
> If not, are there other approaches that still result in (a) without
> doing (b)?
I think this nails the issue very precisely. It seems that we shouldn't be telling people how to model the data within their systems, but how to present correct and reliable information in an FRBR way and hopefully, to be able to make this information available for harvesting according to some standard formats. The "manifestation" record could be a virtual, generated view of the relationships between the work/expression and the items, which is what it purports to be anyway. Higher level views of works and expressions could be generated in the same way.
If the correct FRBR displays can be generated, catalogers can be trained to deal with it.
James Weinheimer
Received on Fri Dec 07 2007 - 08:44:49 EST