 |
 |
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