Matthew Beacom wrote :
> The abstract for Bernd Frohmann's talk at the DOCAM 06 conference . . .
> is a nice précis of the struggle to define words. Too bad the full transcript
> of the talk is not online.
Very incidentally -- could the mention of "Brier’s ideas" in the last
sentence of that abstract be a meaningful slip-of-the-keyboard : had
he been reading too much -- or thinking too much of the ideas -- of
Søren ? Or did he actually *mean* Søren ?
and :
> Briet, Suzanne, and Ronald E. Day. What Is Documentation?: English
> Translation of the Classic French Text. Lanham, Md.: Scarecrow Press,
> 2006.
And Day's own work is not entirely irrelevant, either.
- Laval Hunsucker
Amsterdam, Nederland
----- Original Message ----
From: "Beacom, Matthew" <matthew.beacom_at_YALE.EDU>
To: NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU
Sent: Tue, January 26, 2010 3:06:13 PM
Subject: Re: [NGC4LIB] Again Re: [NGC4LIB] (Meta)Data was: [NGC4LIB] LIBER Quarterly Article on Europeana
FYI I thought this was not available in English, but _Qu'est-ce que la documentation?_ by Suzanne Briet is available in an English translation.
Briet, Suzanne, and Ronald E. Day. What Is Documentation?: English Translation of the Classic French Text. Lanham, Md.: Scarecrow Press, 2006.
Although using an implied and ad hoc instrumental definition of "document" or "resource" is sensible, practical and sound, there is still much value in explicit and formal thinking and talking about definitions.
Matthew Beacom
p.s. The abstract for Bernd Frohmann's talk at the DOCAM 06 conference, "Revisiting 'What is a Document?'"
<http://thedocumentacademy.org/resources/2006/abstracts/DOCAM06%20Abstract.RTF.pdf>
is a nice précis of the struggle to define words. Too bad the full transcript of the talk is not online.
-----Original Message-----
From: Next generation catalogs for libraries [mailto:NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU] On Behalf Of Bernhard Eversberg
Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 2010 8:54 AM
To: NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU
Subject: Re: [NGC4LIB] Again Re: [NGC4LIB] (Meta)Data was: [NGC4LIB] LIBER Quarterly Article on Europeana
Laval Hunsucker wrote:
>
> The event yielded other relevant approaches to what a
> document is and does, such as that of Zacklad. See
> http://thedocumentacademy.org/resources/2006/program.html.
>
The Dublin Core Initiative started out talking about "documents",
then moved on briefly to "document-like objects", but today they
carefully avoid the term, and although "resource" has taken its
place, there is no attempt at a definition of "resource".
This is following Einstein's wisdom when he said "Time is what a
clock can measure".
So, might we not as well say "A document (or ressource) is whatever we
want to make identifiable and more easily findable"? And we do
this by ascribing attributes to it ("duration: 12 min") rather
than trying to say what it is.
B.Eversberg
Received on Tue Jan 26 2010 - 10:20:55 EST