 |
 |
A big mistake, if it means what we think it means, that RDA has decided that a given Manifestation can not contain several Expressions. Riley, Jenn wrote: >> What the RDA folks (that is, the folks >> who have created RDA, the JSC members) said (some of them off-list to >> me), is that if your manifestation is an aggregate, then your >> Expression must be an equal aggregate. So the Expression is pretty >> much one-to-one with the Manifestation. (And I think we were all >> seeing a many-to-many.) >> > > I see this conclusion as RDA's, but not FRBR's. The FRBR report explicitly > says there can be a many-to-one relationship between Expressions and a > Manifestation (that is, a Manifestation can embody several Expressions), and > the V/FRBR project takes that at face value and does not impose the > additional restriction that a Manifestation contains an equal aggregate. RDA > may impose that restriction, but that's their implementation of FRBR, and > the V/FRBR project as *not* an RDA implementation doesn't feel bound by that > decision. > > Obviously I think that RDA has made a mistake in adding in a requirement > that "if your manifestation is an aggregate, then your Expression must be an > equal aggregate." But that's their business, I guess. > > Jenn > > ======================== > Jenn Riley > Metadata Librarian > Digital Library Program > Indiana University - Bloomington > Wells Library W501 > (812) 856-5759 > www.dlib.indiana.edu > > Inquiring Librarian blog: www.inquiringlibrarian.blogspot.com > >