Yup, it's slow going.  It seems so far if you just keep hitting reload
after the errors it eventually gets through.  It's keeping the
information in session somehow.

Of course, I'm on step 8 after 40 minutes.....so I'm hoping I don't
have to start over again..


Jon Gorman

On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 11:39 AM, Doran, Michael D <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Is anyone else having trouble connecting to the Code4Lib registration website (https://www.confmanager.com/main.cfm?cid=2375)?  It took me about 15 minutes to get connected initially, now it's hanging after page 2 (of 9?).
>
> -- Michael
>
> # Michael Doran, Systems Librarian
> # University of Texas at Arlington
> # 817-272-5326 office
> # 817-688-1926 mobile
> # [log in to unmask]
> # http://rocky.uta.edu/doran/
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Code for Libraries [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Karen
>> Coyle
>> Sent: Monday, December 13, 2010 9:51 AM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Announcing OLAC's prototype FRBR-inspired moving image
>> discovery interface
>>
>> Quoting "Beacom, Matthew" <[log in to unmask]>:
>>
>> Sometimes I feel like we should all have the FRBR diagram tattoo'd on
>> our arms so we can consult it any time anywhere. :-)
>>
>>
>> >
>> > With as complex a thing as a film--so many "authors", images, music,
>> > dialog, acting, sets, costume, etc., etc., etc., applying the FRBR
>> > model is tough, and your implementation is quite sensible. However,
>> > I had a small question about one thing you said about FRBR not
>> > allowing language at the work level. That doesn't seem right to me.
>> > How could the language of a thing that is primarily or even
>> > partially a work made of language--like a novel or a motion picture
>> > with spoken dialogue would not necessarily be considered at the work
>> > level and not at some other level.
>>
>> Matthew, I can't answer how it is possible but I can tell you that it
>> is a fact: language is an attribute of Expression, not of Work. That's
>> kind of the key meaning of frbr:Expression -- it is the Expression of
>> the Work, and the Work doesn't exist until Expressed. So Work is a
>> very abstract concept in FRBR. (Which is why more than one attempted
>> implementation of FRBR that I have seen combines Work and Expression
>> attributes in some way.)
>>
>> Not only that, but Kelley's model uses something that I consider to be
>> missing from FRBR: the concept of a "original Expression." For FRBR
>> (and thus for RDA) all expressions are in a sense equal; there is no
>> privileged first or original expression. Yet there is evidence that
>> this is a useful concept in the minds of users. Some recent user
>> studies [1] around FRBR showed that this is a concept that users come
>> up with spontaneously. Also, I can't think of any field of study where
>> knowing what the original expression of a work was wouldn't be
>> important.
>>
>> > Because of the way we treat translations--not just in FRBR--as what
>> > FRBR calls expressions not as new works, a translation from the
>> > original language to another would be considered an FRBR expression.
>> > Could you explain this a bit more?
>>
>> The FRBR relationship "translation of" is an Expression-to-Expression
>> relationship. (See my personal "cheat sheet" of RDA/FRBR relationships
>> [2]).
>>
>> kc
>> [1] http://www.asis.org/asist2010/abstracts/75.html
>> [2] http://kcoyle.net/rda/group1relsby.html
>>
>> >
>> > Thank you.
>> >
>> > Matthew
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > ...
>> >
>> >> This also allowed us to get around some of the areas of more
>> >> orthodox FRBR modeling that we found unhelpful. For example, FRBR
>> >> doesn't allow language at the Work level, but we think it is
>> >> important to record the original language of a moving image at the
>> >> top level.
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Karen Coyle
>> [log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net
>> ph: 1-510-540-7596
>> m: 1-510-435-8234
>> skype: kcoylenet
>