On Jul 26, 2011, at 10:33 AM, Ted Koppel wrote:
> Do you really want to ignite the types of arguments that would (no doubt) follow?
>
> When was the Old Testament created? Historians and scholars could make a case for a span of thousands of years.
>
> What about the New Testament? One could make a case for 0AD, but the more accurate date would be in the 4th century somewhere.
>
> And those two are just for starters.
>
> Your point about Plato / 1986 is well taken, but is the solution more or less harmful than the problem?
No fair using Aggregate Works as an example of where it breaks down.
I could argue the same thing about collections of anything. I could also
make the 'can't agree' argument for anything that was part of oral tradition
before it was written down.
As for the comments about FRBR, Work, Expression and Manifestation
all have 'date' attributes:
4.2.3 Date of the Work
The date of the work is the date (normally the year) the work was originally created. The date may be a single date or a range of dates. In the absence of an ascertainable date of creation, the date of the work may be associated with the date of its first publication or release.
4.3.3 Date of Expression
The date of expression is the date the expression was created (e.g., the date the particular text of a work was written or revised, the date a song was performed, etc.). The date may be a single date or a range of dates. In the absence of an ascertainable date of expression, the date of the expression may be associated with the date of its publication or release.
4.4.6 Date of Publication/Distribution
The date of publication/distribution of the manifestation is the date (normally a year) of public release of the manifestation. The date may be a single date of publication or release, or a range of dates (e.g., in the case of a serial publication). In the absence of a date designated as the date of publication or release, a copyright date or a date of printing or manufacture may serve as a substitute.
...
so, based on that, I'd have to say that a 1986 'Date of Work' for Plato is
wrong, as it had a publication before 1968, but for a'Date of Publication'
it'd be okay.
And, there's still sufficient guidance on how to handle both aggregate
works and even the issue of texts when we're not sure when it was
written.
Now, I'm not sure if anyone's ever attempted to compare how to handle
dates for different classes of items being cataloged.
Eg, for a film:
W : date the script was written? date it was filmed?
E : date it was edited? (if you consider the director's cut & theatrical release to be the same work)
M : date released in theatres
For a scientific article:
W : date the research was done? date the experiment was designed?
E : date the article was written? date it was submitted to the journal?
M : date it was published
For a translated book
W : date when the first version was written (if you consider translations to be expressions of the same work)
E : date of the translation
M : date of the publication
Some of these are just *easier* to pin down -- eg, the date the article was submitted to the journal vs. when it was actually written.
And, if you go with the 'translation as a new work' approach, then you don't have to worry about when the Old Testament was written unless you're dealing with the Hebrew text.
....
And be glad you don't have to deal with space-time issues. As I deal mostly with
solar images, we have to deal with the 'observation time', but to coordinate with
other telescopes, we convert many of the spacecraft observations to 'earth time'
which is the time when the earth would've seen the same events/phenomena.
-Joe
Received on Tue Jul 26 2011 - 12:38:21 EDT