libdb-develop

[libdb-develop] FRBR paper uses wrong word?

[Terry H. <ha...@an...>]

I also wanted to mention an oddity about the FRBR paper that 
you refered me to. There is a bizarre blunder in this paper 
in the (mis-)usage of the word "Equinox".  Apparently the 
author has confused it with the word "Epoch", i.e.:

"Equinox" has three meanings: 1) one of the two days of the 
year when the night is (nearly) the same length as the day, 
2) an instant in time when the Earth's rotational pole is 
exactly perpendicular to the vector from the Earth's core 
to the Sun's core (which occurs on those days), 3) one of 
the two points in space where the ecliptic crosses the 
equator.

"Epoch" is an absolute instant in time used as a reference 
point.  Usually distinguished from "Interval", being the 
time between two instants, or between an instant and the 
epoch.

I believe that "Epoch" should be substituted for the word 
"Equinox" throughout this paper.  And I'm a little 
mystified that this did not get caught in peer-review of 
the paper.  How much review has this paper seen?

I do hope that the world does not accept FRBR as a standard 
with this mistake uncorrected! :-O

Cheers,
Terry

--
Terry Hancock ( hancock at anansispaceworks.com )
Anansi Spaceworks  http://www.anansispaceworks.com

Re: [libdb-develop] FRBR paper uses wrong word?

[Terry H. <ha...@an...>]

On Friday 05 November 2004 06:05 am, Ed Summers wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 05, 2004 at 03:39:27AM -0600, Terry Hancock 
wrote:
> > I do hope that the world does not accept FRBR as a 
standard 
> > with this mistake uncorrected! :-O
> 
> Maybe you'd be better off writing to the author.

Maybe.  But this is a published paper from 1998, by the
"International Federation of Library Associations' Study
Group on Functional Requirements for Bibliographic
Records".  I can't find an e-mail address for such
comments and as that was 6 years ago, it's unlikely
to be a live topic at the moment, even with its
authors.

OTOH, the fact that a study group of *librarians* would
use terms in their database recommendations without
actually looking them up in a dictionary gives one
pause, and perhaps a little concern about adopting the
standard.  Still, it does seem to be a compelling
design.

I'm betting this was already caught by someone, but
as my only contact with FRBR was through this project,
I thought I should bring it up.  Is there a more
recent/authoritative source for FRBR I should be
looking at?

Cheers,
Terry

--
Terry Hancock ( hancock at anansispaceworks.com )
Anansi Spaceworks  http://www.anansispaceworks.com

Re: [libdb-develop] FRBR paper uses wrong word?

[Ed S. <eh...@po...>]

On Sun, Nov 07, 2004 at 08:22:04PM -0600, Terry Hancock wrote:
> OTOH, the fact that a study group of *librarians* would
> use terms in their database recommendations without
> actually looking them up in a dictionary gives one
> pause, and perhaps a little concern about adopting the
> standard.  Still, it does seem to be a compelling
> design.
> 
> I'm betting this was already caught by someone, but
> as my only contact with FRBR was through this project,
> I thought I should bring it up.  Is there a more
> recent/authoritative source for FRBR I should be
> looking at?

Not that I know of, but then again I have no idea what paper 
you are looking at. :-)

//Ed

Re: [libdb-develop] FRBR paper uses wrong word?

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

> I also wanted to mention an oddity about the FRBR paper that 
> you refered me to. There is a bizarre blunder in this paper 
> in the (mis-)usage of the word "Equinox".  Apparently the 
> author has confused it with the word "Epoch", i.e.:

I'll forward this off to the FRBR mailing list. For what it's worth, 
there is a WG for the FRBR, and there are numerous mailing list / 
conference only suggestions that have not yet made it into a revised 
Final Report. There is a list of TODO's that the WG wants to address, 
but the most recent conference suggested that "2003/2004" was a 
"disappointing" year because little actually got done.

See:

  http://www.ifla.org/VII/s13/wgfrbr/wgfrbr.htm
  http://www.ifla.org/VII/s13/wgfrbr/listserv.htm

-- 
Morbus Iff ( drowning in data, bereft of knowledge. )
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

Re: [libdb-develop] FRBR paper uses wrong word?

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

> I also wanted to mention an oddity about the FRBR paper that 
> you refered me to. There is a bizarre blunder in this paper 
> in the (mis-)usage of the word "Equinox".  Apparently the 
> author has confused it with the word "Epoch", i.e.:

Here is the response from the FRBR list:

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [Fwd: [libdb-develop] FRBR paper uses wrong word?]
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 11:27:17 -0500
From: Barbara B Tillett <bt...@lo...>
To: <mo...@di...>, <fr...@in...>

Just wanted to point out in cartographic cataloging that the equinox is
expressed as a year that is given following coordinates for celestial
charts, and in Anglo-American Cataloguing Rules one may also add a
statement of the epoch when it differs from the equinox.  The definition
of equinox is indeed the third one listed by your colleague below.
Actually in the Cartographic materials, 2nd edition the definition as
taken from the United States Defense Mapping Agency is:
"One of two points of intersection of the ecliptic and the celestial
equator, occupied by the sun when its declination is 0 degrees."  And
the rules go on to say this is recorded as a year.

There is no confusion with the word epoch.

You may wish to see an example under AACR2 rule 3.3D2.  I can't do
superscripts with this email message...

FRBR has it right (see 4.2.12 where it is defined). - Barbara Tillett

-- 
Morbus Iff ( drowning in data, bereft of knowledge. )
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