Re: Slightly OT: MARC

Anthony,

On 7/20/2010 6:36 AM, Antony Pitts wrote:
> Patrick,
> Thank you, I was having a great day.  The only parallel with Wikipedia 
> I was drawing (although there could be others) was that were one to 
> harness crowds to aid the process of brokering of SIs of various 
> kinds, a critical mass might be obtained relatively early (say, three 
> to five years) while brokering would continue indefinitely (say, a 
> thousand years... ;-)
Hee, hee. Personally I think it would continue indefinitely.

That is to say that I think we are always working out what other people 
mean, what subjects they are identifying, micro-mapping you might say 
and that topic maps are useful in representing persistent mappings that 
we want to make known to others.

If enough of us do that and map between identifiers, we all persist with 
"our" identifiers but have more information on particular subjects.
> Personally, I would find a system where I can choose whether or not to 
> believe Jo Bloggs' brokering of two SIs, intentional or not (e.g. from 
> DBpedia and Grovemusic - "they're talking about the same Beethoven"), 
> based on a clout rating system (such as Amazon or eBay) preferable to 
> the current subject wilderness.
Without a doubt!

Patrick
> Cheers,
> Antony
> http://www.musicdna.info
>
>     ----- Original Message -----
>     *From:* Patrick Durusau <mailto:patrick-Q/[email protected]>
>     *To:* topicmapmail-Zo64W7twoUFWk0Htik3J/[email protected] <mailto:topicmapmail-Zo64W7twoUFWk0Htik3J/[email protected]>
>     *Sent:* Tuesday, July 20, 2010 11:08 AM
>     *Subject:* Re: [topicmapmail] Slightly OT: MARC
>
>      Sender *ALLOWED* 	 [ Remove
>     <https://www.vqme.com/pk/banner?op=remove_from_allow&From=topicmapmail%2Dbounces-Zo64W7twoUFWk0Htik3J/[email protected]&VU=/fETxBahco9D5M6tYKapzA>
>     ]  [ Block
>     <https://www.vqme.com/pk/banner?op=block_sender&From=topicmapmail%2Dbounces-Zo64W7twoUFWk0Htik3J/[email protected]&VU=/fETxBahco9D5M6tYKapzA>
>     ] 	details <https://www.vqme.com/userguide/details_allow.html>
>
>     Vanquish Anti-Spam Control Panel <https://www.vqme.com/pk/heldemail>
>
>
>     Anthony,
>
>     On 7/20/2010 3:46 AM, Antony Pitts wrote:
>     > 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.
>     >
>
>     I don't see Wikipedia as an analogy for mapping subject
>     identifications.
>     Taking nothing away from its usefulness, but comparing the level of
>     detail in Wikipedia to Corpus Juris Secundum (an encyclopedia of
>     American Jurisprudence) makes the gap in terms of subjects fairly
>     stark.
>     And each of those subjects can have one or more identifications in at
>     least 50 distinct legal jurisdictions, to say nothing of overlapping
>     regulatory bodies and our much beloved federal government.
>
>     To be sure, at a certain level of coarseness, even the SW looks
>     doable,
>     but do you really want to rely on medical advice based on information
>     coarsened to make it tractable to an automated system or easy
>     completion
>     by volunteers?
>
>     Personally I think a fairly coarse topic map for some areas could be
>     very useful and "acquire a critical mass" as you say, but it
>     should not
>     be mistaken as being a source of final answers. Wikipedia is very
>     useful, hell, I use it nearly every day, but only as a starting
>     point.
>     There is a very broad and deep world beyond Wikipedia.
>
>     Hope you are having a great day!
>
>     Patrick
>
>
>
>     > 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: 271.1.1/3016 - Release Date:
>     07/19/10 19:36:00
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> topicmapmail mailing list
> topicmapmail-Zo64W7twoUFWk0Htik3J/[email protected]
> http://www.infoloom.com/mailman/listinfo/topicmapmail
>    

-- 
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