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