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