libdb-develop

[libdb-develop] Fwd: Identifiers Relate To Manifestations, Except When...

[Morbus I. <mo...@di...>]

 >Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 18:56:37 -0500
 >To: fr...@in...
 >From: Morbus Iff <mo...@di...>
 >Subject: Identifiers Relate To Manifestations, Except When...
 >
 >In 99% of the cases I can think of, an identifier is related to a
 >manifestation. ISBNs, ISSNs, DOIs, UPC's, Amazon ASINs, etc., etc.
 >I haven't had any problem coming to this conclusion: identifiers
 >should relate to the physical manifestation of the expression.
 >
 >Except... when it comes to an IMDb identifier. Some of you will recognize
 >my pseudonym from previous discussions and questions about movies under
 >FRBR, and I've been largely silent because I'm coding like mad on the
 >LibDB project [1]. As I was working on the identifiers interface,
 >however, I realized that I'd like to include the IMDb identifier
 >for a particular movie.
 >
 >For example, here's a URL for a movie at
 >IMDB: http://imdb.com/title/tt0368296/.
 >The identifier is "tt0368296".
 >
 >But IMDb doesn't talk about physical manifestations of movies, it
 >talks about the movies themselves: in other words, the expression.
 >The IMDb identifier should be related to the expression.
 >
 >Does this make sense? How are other people handling identifiers?
 >Can anyone think of similar identifiers that are better to an
 >expression than a manifestation? If the IMDb identifier is a
 >rarity, then I think, for now, I'll just relate them to the
 >manifestation and jot a note down somewhere. If, however, people
 >can think of more instances where an expression is a better
 >relationship, I'll have to rethink some things.
 >
 >[1] http://disobey.com/noos/LibDB/

-- 
Morbus Iff ( think about the good things that I did for you )
Technical: http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/au/779
Culture: http://www.disobey.com/ and http://www.gamegrene.com/
icq: 2927491 / aim: akaMorbus / yahoo: morbus_iff / jabber.org: morbus

[libdb-develop] Re:Fwd: Identifiers Relate To Manifestations, Except When...

[Richard A. <lil...@ya...>]

>Morbus wrote:
>In 99% of the cases I can think of, an identifier is
related to a
>manifestation. ISBNs, ISSNs, DOIs, UPC's, Amazon
ASINs, etc., etc.
>I haven't had any problem coming to this
conclusion: identifiers
  >should relate to the physical manifestation of the
expression.
  >
  >Except... when it comes to an IMDb identifier....
>But IMDb doesn't talk about physical manifestations
of movies, it
  >talks about the movies themselves: in other words,
the expression.
>The IMDb identifier should be related to the
expression.
>
>Does this make sense? How are other people handling
identifiers?
>Can anyone think of similar identifiers that are
better to an
>expression than a manifestation?
I have been following the LibDB
project, but have little actual knowledge of
programming or
FRBR for that matter. Having said that, I won't let it
keep me from giving my 2 cents.

The interface will essentially dictate that the
owner/cataloguer physically handle the item and enter
all works, expressions, and  manifestations correct?

Okay, now, after the initial data entry the other
identifiers mentioned (ISBNs, ISSNs, etc) will allow
said person to readily identify a given manifestation
of an expression so as to either:
a.Locate a physical copy
b.Cross-reference it with another work, expression, or
manifestation.
c.Replace a lost copy of a manifestation with an exact
copy.

Any other identifier (IMDB, MusicBrainz ID) would
allow one to reference information that is already
entered in LibDB(?). I say keep these "extra"
identifiers with the expression, or in the case of
ArtistID's (MusicBrainz example:
http://musicbrainz.org/artist/83d91898-7763-47d7-b03b-b92132375c47.html)with
the person or (corporate) body.



	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Photos: High-quality 4x6 digital prints for 25¢
http://photos.yahoo.com/ph/print_splash