On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 3:25 PM, Lars Aronsson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> On 12/11/2011 08:52 PM, Simon Spero wrote:
>
>> The point I was trying to make is not related to any kind of display- it
>> is about how the meanings of the statements derived from a record are only
>>
>
> The reality that library catalog records try to "record" is the
> physical book, and in particular its title page. When MARC was invented, it
> was not realistic to take and store a digital photo of the title page,but
> today this is entirely realistic. Unlike the book cover, there is
> most often no copyrighted elements on the title page, so there would be no
> legal problems.
>
> Is photography still absent from library cataloging?
>
> I have seen old card catalogs digitized with photos of each card, but I
> have not yet seen a catalog with photos of title pages. (Unless you
> count digitization projects like Google Books.)


[ many catalogs have cover art - e.g.
http://search.lib.unc.edu/search?R=UNCb4450200 .
  On the recording of title/verso, see e.g.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/asi.20551/abstract
  Under US law the use of thumbnailed cover art for identification purposes
is generally considered to be fair use under the rule of
*Ariba<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelly_v._Arriba_Soft_Corporation>
 , *
  Original Subject cataloging is not an act of   transcription ]
*
*
These issues are orthogonal to the point I'm trying to make, which is that
records are collections of related assertions, and that the
interrelationship between  these assertions is a necessary part of their
meaning.

Simon