Search (1 results, page 1 of 1)

0.0036968153 = product of:
  0.014787261 = sum of:
    0.014787261 = product of:
      0.029574523 = sum of:
        0.029574523 = weight(_text_:aspects in 175) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.029574523 = score(doc=175,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.20938325 = queryWeight, product of:
              4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
              0.046325076 = queryNorm
            0.14124589 = fieldWeight in 175, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              4.5198684 = idf(docFreq=1308, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=175)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)

Footnote

The FRBR entities as much as their attributes and relationships are highlighted and analyzed in the first section of the work by authors such as: Olivia Madison, chair of the FRBR Study Group, Glenn Patton, Tom Delsey and Stefan Gradmann. One of the general ideas of this first part is that there is still work to be done for the extension of the model to cover more aspects of subject access. Olivia Madison, with an insider's point of view, takes the reader on a historical approach to the IFLA Study on FRBR. The subject representation and authority issues are illustrated by Patton and Delsey in two articles in which the FRANAR (Functional Requirements and Numbering of Authority Records) conceptual model is investigated. While speaking about the low visibility of library catalogues on the Web, Gradmann proposes as a solution the implementation of FRBR as RDF Schema and of RDF-based library catalogues using semantic Web technology. He explains how catalogues should go from the "librarian ivory tower" (p. 65) into the semantic Web and discusses the benefits of the proposed approach. The second section is dedicated to the applicability of the FRBR model to different types of library materials such as: hand press materials, in the article by Gunilla Jonsson, reiterating the expression problem; literary texts, in the view of the AustLit Gateway pointing out the use of enhanced manifestations by Kerry Kilner; musical aggregate works, seen as an experience of translation of the FRBR model by Patrick LeBoeuf; digital documents, in a description of the Norwegian Paradigma Project by Kertil Albertsen and Carol van Nuys; performing art productions, as creations difficult to be held in library collections by David Miller and Patrick LeBoeuf and oral tradition works as independent, collective but not impossible to grasp human creations by Yann Nicolas.
What is, after all the FRBR model? The question is asked in the subtitle itself: is it a "hype or cureall?" It certainly is the talk of the day in libraries and similar institutions, a very popular topic for professional meetings, a challenging task for system vendors and food for thought for scholars both in terminology and in content. As for the solutions it offers, they enable simplified and more structured catalogues of large collections and perhaps easier ways to cataloguing resources of many different types. Once implemented in catalogues, the benefits will be both on the librarian's side and on the end user's side. According to Patrick LeBoeuf the model is a beginning and there are two directions for its development as far as the authors of the articles imply: the first, oriented to the configuration of FRANAR or FRAR, the second, oriented to what has already been established and defined as FRSAR (Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Records). The latter is meant to build a conceptual model for Group 3 entities within the FRBR framework related to the aboutness of the work and assist in an assessment of the potential for international sharing and use of subject authority data both within the library sector and beyond. A third direction, not present in the work considered, yet mentioned by the editor, is oriented towards the development of "the CIDOC CRM semantic model for cultural heritage information in museums and assimilated institutions" (p. 6). By merging the FRBR working group with the CIDOC CRM Special Interest Group a FRBR/CRM Harmonization Group has been created its scope being the "translation" of FRBR into object-oriented formalism. The work under review is the expected and welcome completion of the FRBR Final Report of 1998, addressing librarians, library science teaching staff, students, and library system vendors, a comprehensive source of information on theoretical aspects and practical application of the FRBR conceptual model. A good companion clarifying many FRBR issues the collection is remarkably well structured and offers a step-by-step insight into the model. An additional feature of the work is the very helpful index at the back of the book providing an easy access to the main topics discussed."