Re: Slightly OT: MARC

Patrick,

Yes, in many if not all cases brokering will continue as new sources are
taken into account and history reinterpreted, but the bulk of the "work"
could/will be done in a relatively short timespan, I would have thought - a
bit like the time it took for Wikipedia to acquire a critical mass.

Cheers,
Antony

[I, too, managed not to post my initial reply]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Patrick Durusau
To: Antony Pitts
Cc: [email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 2:02 AM
Subject: Re: [topicmapmail] Slightly OT: MARC


Antony,

<<
On 7/19/2010 7:36 PM, Antony Pitts wrote:
Patrick,

From what I understand from various record companies and broadcasters, it's
a similar story with ISRC codes - the "unique identifiers" for sound
recordings.

The thing is, humans can spot the differences fairly easily on a
case-by-case basis - hence the power of crowd-editing, whereas computers can
deal with vast catalogues that our minds would have immense trouble
remembering and sorting.

Perhaps the solution (at least this is the way we're heading with the
musicDNA project) is community-brokered PSIs, more-or-less.
>>

+1!

Ultimately the question comes down to: Does some user or group of users
recognize two or more representatives as representing the same subject?

Whatever our machines generate is a suggestion, nothing more.

I am reading Berlo's "The Process of Communication" (1960) and he has a
fascinating treatment on why meaning is not found in messages but only in
people. I won't try to do justice to his argument in an email post but will
see if I can create a summary for my blog.

While "community-brokered PSIs" would be a very good thing, I suspect that
over time, even fairly short times, 15 to 20 years (I studied Ancient Near
Eastern texts before I got into the technology stuff so 15 to 20 years is an
eye blink), that you will be able to observe shifting community usages. And
once the social context changes, we will have the record for the usage but
no one will understand it quite the same way.

Hope you are having a great day!

Patrick


<<
Antony

http://www.musicdna.info
>>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Patrick Durusau
To: topicmapmail-Zo64W7twoUFWk0Htik3J/[email protected]
Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 12:01 AM
Subject: Re: [topicmapmail] Slightly OT: MARC


 Sender ALLOWED  [ Remove ]  [ Block ]   details

Vanquish Anti-Spam Control Panel




Lars,

It isn't that every library "does its own thing."

ISBNs are actually assigned by publishers.

Each publisher is assigned a block of numbers but management of the
numbers in that block is left up to them.

Bad idea.

Some publishers, often after a decent period of time, simply recycle the
numbers. :-(

Or even give a first and second edition of a book the same number.

Or correct their original mistake with the numbers.

(I worked for a consortium that wasn't always real particular about its
use of ISBNs. Wasn't my department but stories of earlier mis-deeds
circulated.)

Or do many of the horrors that have been described.

But, as Alex suggested, it isn't completely useless, it just isn't
failsafe to rely upon.

We have some helpful identifiers for books, but perhaps not completely
reliable as a global identifier. How's that?

Given the amount of time and energy that has been devoted to the sub-set
of subjects that are books, does that give a clue as to what more
ambitious projects to give all subjects a single unique identifier are
going to wind up?

Hope you are having a great evening!

Patrick

On 7/19/2010 6:40 PM, Lars Heuer wrote:
> Hi Alex,
>
> [ISBN]
>
>> Have you ever searched for a book by its ISBN only to find books
>> completely unrelated? Yeah, same ISBNs can be different books in
>>
> No, I don't I thought the ISBN is a GUUID? It isn't?
>
>
>> But of course we can use both of these to *help* us create an identity
>> for a book. However, book identity is complex when you dig into
>>
> Well, my question was "Do we have something like a GUUID in MARC?"
> Your answer and the answer of Maria seem to deny it.
>
> I wonder how someone in the US could exchange information about the
> book "XY" with DE? This seems to be impossible according to your
> respond and to the respond of Maria.
>
> That's a "bit" strange...
>
> So, the conclusion is: We don't have any global identifier? Each
> library does its own thing?
>
> I can't believe that....
>
> Best regards,
> Lars
>

-- 
Patrick Durusau
patrick-Q/[email protected]
Chair, V1 - US TAG to JTC 1/SC 34
Convener, JTC 1/SC 34/WG 3 (Topic Maps)
Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300
Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps)

Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net
Homepage: http://www.durusau.net
Twitter: patrickDurusau
_______________________________________________
topicmapmail mailing list
topicmapmail-Zo64W7twoUFWk0Htik3J/[email protected]
http://www.infoloom.com/mailman/listinfo/topicmapmail




No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.839 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3014 - Release Date: 07/18/10
19:35:00



-- 
Patrick Durusau
patrick-Q/[email protected]
Chair, V1 - US TAG to JTC 1/SC 34
Convener, JTC 1/SC 34/WG 3 (Topic Maps)
Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300
Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps)

Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net
Homepage: http://www.durusau.net
Twitter: patrickDurusau





No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.839 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3014 - Release Date: 07/18/10
19:35:00