> . . . ignores a whole swath of user activities that
> only begin once someone has obtained a resource.
This is indeed, as it has long (always?) been, the one
great black hole of LIS research, LIS knowledge, and
LIS practice. And it's devilishly difficult, at best. But
had LIS really been interested in seriously pursuing
the question ( beyond perhaps a few naive, over-
simplified, superficial models ), that process would
surely have begun long before now. Not that it really
matters all that much. Even if we *had* made the
necessary effort, we would most probably have
flopped miserably.
We're just out of our depth here, and it's not really
any of our business anyway. Voici the reason that
we'll never be more than peripheral to the scholarly,
creative enterprise. And that's imho precisely as it
should be. Acknowledging that circumstance ( at
long last ), and learning to live with it elegantly,
would really not be difficult, and would make life
a lot more pleasant for all concerned.
- Laval Hunsucker
Breukelen, Nederland
----- Original Message ----
From: Karen Coyle <lists_at_kcoyle.net>
To: NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU
Sent: Fri, April 23, 2010 7:51:35 PM
Subject: Re: [NGC4LIB] Designing future "catalogs" - where do the users come in?
The other thing I like about it, other than it is activity-driven, is that it is about the "use" of information, not just finding resources. I feel like the FRBr model, ending with "obtain" ignores a whole swath of user activities that only begin once someone has obtained a resource. Yet manipulation of bibliographic resources is key to a whole host of activities that take place after a person passes by the circ desk.
kc
Quoting MJ Suhonos <mj_at_SUHONOS.CA>:
> On 2010-04-23, at 1:38 PM, Karen Coyle wrote:
>
>> Not precisely what you are looking for, but I often make use of this
>> http://kcoyle.net/temp/behaviors.jpg
>> as a comparison to the FRBR tasks. It comes from a Mellon project, and if I dig I can get you a link to that.
>
> Karen, this is *extremely* helpful — I just had the insight yesterday that modelling metadata around events, rather than ("just") entities might be another way to look at the problem, and figured that someone must have already gone down this road before. This one's going on my wall. Thanks.
>
> MJ
>
--Karen Coyle
kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
ph: 1-510-540-7596
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet
Received on Sat Apr 24 2010 - 16:29:10 EDT
