[libdb-develop] Re: W "Forms" and the use of matching "Roles"

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

From: Maja =CEumer <Maj...@nu...> on the FRBR list:
 >But back to the serious i.e. FRBR matters. Regarding 'form of
 >work': as you may have seen in the FRBR/CRM Heraklion meeting
 >report, we already discussed the issue and decided that it is not
 >a work attribute, but a constraining super-type of the work or,
 >rather, type of Representative expression. (Martin, did I get

This I didn't know - thanks for the update. It would seem, then,
that one possible solution to my problem ("how should I restrict
the display of roles based on the type of work being added") would
be to create a hierarchical taxonomy of types, such that a "super
type" of "text" (for example) would encompass the more
specific types of "book" and "poem". A very rough sketch:

  text    > (book, children's book, short story, poem)
  video   > (animation, stop motion, documentary, news reel)

Then, instead of roles being specific to a "book", they'd be
specific to a "text" type (thus, being inherited for short
stories, poems, and so on and so forth).

My current data model for LibDB has no way of storing these
"super-types", so I'll have to revisit it with that in mind.

From: PAT...@bn... on the FRBR list:
 >To answer Morbus' question: I think that the institution that has=
 developed
 >the closes thing to what he needs is the AustLit Gateway Team. Do not
 >hesitate to contact Kerry Kilner or Kent Fitch or Carol Hetherington on my
 >behalf. They are subscribers of this listserv and can be contacted at
 >fr...@nl.... But AustLit Gateway is only concerned with literary
 >textual works, not with audiovisual materials. They have developed an
 >authoritative list for:
 >
 >http://www.austlit.edu.au/common/manual/AuthorityLists.html#WorkTypeTerms
 >http://www.austlit.edu.au/common/manual/AuthorityLists.html#FormTerms
 >http://www.austlit.edu.au/common/manual/AuthorityLists.html#GenreTerms

From: Bruce D'Arcus <bd...@fa...> on the LibDB-develop list:
 >http://www.loc.gov/marc/sourcecode/genre/genrelist.html
 >http://www.loc.gov/marc/sourcecode/form/formlist.html

These URLs have been very helpful!

 From a semantic standpoint, is there any consensus on terms here? Is
the "form" of a Work turning into a "super-type"? And is AustLit's
"Genre" really matches for the Group 3 Concept? And is MARC's
"Genre" the equivalent of the FRBR/CRM's "super-type"?


--=20
Morbus Iff ( you, me, eropuri? aawwwwwWWWw yYeahahhHHAhhh )
Culture: http://www.disobey.com/ and http://www.gamegrene.com/
Spidering Hacks: http://amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0596005776/disobeycom
icq: 2927491 / aim: akaMorbus / yahoo: morbus_iff / jabber.org: morbus