Re: new bibliographic data schema proposal

Bruce D'Arcus writes:
 > On 4/25/06, Markus Hoenicka <[email protected]> wrote:
 > 
 > > Bruce D'Arcus writes:
 > >  > I guess I just mean that levels are only one kind of relation of
 > >  > relevance, and that there are other important ones. Likewise, to have
 > >  > top-level elements like journalarticle is flattening the typing model.
 > >
 > > Again I don't quite understand. journalarticle is a type that
 > > describes an article published in a journal (using the analytical
 > > information).
 > 
 > But notice the difference even in how you describe it using natural
 > language. There are articles that are published in periodicals
 > (newspapers, magazines, journals, newsletters). The related type is
 > not intrinsic to the primary reference type.
 > 

What is your primary reference type here? For me it is
newspaperarticle, journalarticle and so on. This is because these have
different content models. E.g. a newspaperarticle reference may
contain the section that the article appeared in (U.S., world, business,
arts, sports etc). A journalarticle reference doesn't. Remember that
the schema was designed to guide the user what data to enter.

 > But sure, the query to grab the part vs. monographic title is going to
 > be different when referring to the chapter than it is when referring
 > to the book it is in. This is only logical; isn't it?
 > 

What I was trying to say is this: in your system you have to query for
a container title if you're interested what book a chapter was
published in. You have to query for a standalone title if you're
interested in the book. But in both cases the data relate to the same
physical book. This distinction does not make sense to me. If you want
a book title, you're asking for monographic data, regardless of
whether that book contains chapters or is part of a series.

 > E.g. you say to someone "look at the chapter titled 'abc' in the book
 > called 'xyz'." You don't say "look at analytical title 'abc' that has
 > a monographic title 'xyz'."
 > 

But the meaning is equivalent (as every librarian could
witness). Whereas it is utmost confusing if you tell someone "look at
the item 'xyz' unless it is a book that contains chapters. In that
case, look at the container 'xyz' which will contain the item
'abc'". This just allows you to make the same errors like RIS in a
much more sophisticated way.

regards,
Markus

-- 
Markus Hoenicka
[email protected]
(Spam-protected email: replace the quadrupeds with "mhoenicka")
http://www.mhoenicka.de



-------------------------------------------------------
Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642