Thanks, Jon. I have seen the Variations work and also talked to Jenn Riley about it. It has definitely influenced me, although we are going in a slightly different direction and moving images have some different needs from music.

One thing about Variations that struck me is this paragraph from the usability testing report (http://www.dlib.indiana.edu/projects/vfrbr/projectDoc/usability/usabilityTest/ScherzoUTestReport.pdf):

"There was an assumption among the development team that works would be a window for organizing and narrowing results in a way that users searching for scores and recordings would find useful. One of the main ideas behind FRBR is that the work, or the intellectual entity that is produced by people and is packaged in many forms, is the core information – Scherzo’s interface reflected that organization. 4 (See Appendix E, Fig. 14 for Scherzo’s search results page.) But the participants tended to latch on to a person’s name and search for that name in a particular role. The reasons for this are not completely clear and further discussion follows, but it is worth bearing this finding in mind. Additionally, from the search results page, work results were clicked only 14 times in comparison to items in recordings & scores , which were clicked 65 times. Regardless of how the FRBRized data is organized on the back end, the interface needs to reflect the way users want to search, and that might not mean with search results organized by work."

Does this mean that a work-focused approach is not actually what users want or need? Does it mean that the work-centered approach needs to be implemented differently in the user interface? Are these results somehow specific to music? Do they reflect users' familiarity with the typical library catalog and the strategies they've become accustomed to using?

It does suggest to me that there should be more studies on how users interact with FRBRized data (and not just the clustering that so many discovery interfaces do now, but real FRBR-based data) and how FRBRized data is best presented.

Kelley

On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 11:35 AM, Dunn, Jon William Butcher <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
Hi Kelley,

If you haven't already, you might want to look at the music score and sound recording FRBRization work done on the Variations-FRBR project here at Indiana University. I'm not sure how directly useful this would be for your work with moving images, but there may be some useful mapping ideas:

FRBR XML schemas: http://www.dlib.indiana.edu/projects/vfrbr/schemas/1.1/index.shtml

MARC->FRBR mapping specifications: http://www.dlib.indiana.edu/projects/vfrbr/projectDoc/metadata/mappings/spring2010/vfrbrSpring2010mappings.shtml

Java FRBRization code and documentation: http://www.dlib.indiana.edu/projects/vfrbr/projectDoc/index.shtml

Jon