Re: our profession's bibliographic information

From: Laval Hunsucker <amoinsde_at_nyob>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2010 10:47:42 -0800
To: NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU
> Is a long book a better book?

There were long ago those ( and one noteworthy in
particular ) who passionately believed that a long book
was a worse book, as any classicist knows.
See e.g. : 
http://www.answers.com/topic/mega-biblion-mega-kakon
and
"Big book, big evil" in
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Callimachus#Works


- Laval Hunsucker
  Marienstraße 23
  Berlin
  Deutschland



----- Original Message ----
From: Ted Koppel <tpk_at_AUTO-GRAPHICS.COM>
To: NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU
Sent: Tue, December 21, 2010 5:01:13 PM
Subject: Re: [NGC4LIB] our profession's bibliographic information

Is a long book a better book?

Why not look at (and adapt) the ONIX Specification P.11, P.15, and P.17 data 
constructs, that deal with quantitative measures like the number of 
illustrations, the number of prizes awarded, etc., to a title.  After all, if a 
picture is worth a thousand words, think of how bloated these quantitative 
indicators could be!

Ted


      
Received on Tue Dec 21 2010 - 13:48:28 EST