 |
 |
On Wed, 14 Jan 2009, Jonathan Rochkind wrote: > The Getty terms do seem to be more or less what I'm looking for, under > "information artifacts by physical forms". I'm not sure if I can re-use them > without a license from them though? > And oddly it breaks things into different hiearchies than I would. To me, > "CD" vs. "phonograph record" are peers, when the CD is being used to hold > sound. But AAT keeps "CD" out of the "sound recordings" hieararchy, and > instead just puts it in "machine-readable artifacts". I guess this is the > danger of hieararchy, especially with such a slippery concept as form. That's probably because CDs are more than just sound recordings. For instance, there's CD-i and Kodak's Photo CD standard, CD-ROM, VCD, CD+, CD-Text, etc. They all use the same media, but the data written onto them is not necessarily audio. What you're calling 'CD' is probably more accurately 'CDDA' (Compact Disk Digital Audio). -Joe