AW: [Dini-ag-kim-bestandsdaten] Re: Holdings, Units, Items and URIs

[Klee, Carsten]

Hi everyone!

Thank you both for your clarifications Jörg and Jakob. Seems I forgot to distinguish between logical and physical Items.

Just let me explain, in my own words, what I think I understand now.

Please forgive me when I going to be verbose, but I want sort out the vocabulary salad in my head.

1 Holding
*       A Holding is somehow a description of a 'bibliographic Item'.

2. Bibliographic Item
*       A 'bibliographic Item' is a logical Item and is also called 'Exemplar' (de/en).
*       "Examples of bibliographic items are: a single book, a set of maps, a musical score with parts, a compact digital disk, a multimedia kit, a manuscript collection, a microform journal, a videotape with an accompanying pamphlet, a loose-leaf publication together with its serially-issued updates, a journal, a newspaper. (Z39.71)"
*       A 'bibliographic Item' consists of one or more 'bibliographic Units'.

3. Bibliographic Unit
*       A 'bibliographic Unit' is a logical Unit.
*       'Bibliographic Units' representing either the hole or a part of a 'bibliographic Item'.
*       There are basic, secondary and supplemental (logical) Units.
*       "Examples of basic bibliographic units are a book, a multivolume encyclopedia, a computer file, a map, a score, a set of orchestral parts, and a publication with separately titled constituent parts. A bibliographic entity composed of several bibliographic units where one does not predominate is considered to have multiple basic bibliographic units; for example, a multimedia kit or a musical score and parts. (Z39.71)"
*       'Bibliographic Units' can have a single 'physical Unit', multipart 'physical Unit' or convoluted 'physical Unit'.

4. Physical Unit
*       Is also called Piece or (physical) Item.
*       "A single part, often a physical part, of a bibliographic unit. (Z39.71)"

Is this right so far?

Cheers!

Carsten

_______________________________________________
Carsten Klee
Abt. Überregionale Bibliographische Dienste IIE
Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin - Preußischer Kulturbesitz

Fon:  +49 30 266-43 44 02

> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: dini-ag-kim-bestandsdaten-bounces at lists.d-nb.de [mailto:dini-ag-kim-
> bestandsdaten-bounces at lists.d-nb.de] Im Auftrag von Jakob Voß
> Gesendet: Montag, 17. Juni 2013 09:54
> An: dini-ag-kim-bestandsdaten at lists.d-nb.de
> Betreff: [Dini-ag-kim-bestandsdaten] Re: Holdings, Units, Items and URIs
>
> Hi,
>
> Thanks to Carsten for the good summary and collection. Thanks also to
> Jörg for showing the complexity of difference between "logical" and
> "physical" bibliographic objects.
>
> In short, there is a n-to-m relationship between logical documents
> (which can be books, articles, series etc.) and physical items (which
> can be bound books, journal issues, PDF files etc.). For the holding
> ontology in RDF I propose to use an "examplarOf" relationship between
> documents and items, as also shown at
>
> https://wiki.dnb.de/display/DINIAGKIM/Scope+of+Holdings
>
> In addition one should support "narrowerExemplar" and "broaderExemplar"
> relationships, for instance to connect a chapter as document with a
> physical book or with a PDF file of the book that contains multiple
> chapters.
>
> Furthermore there is the "holding record", as found in current library
> data. I hope I don't disillusion anyone, but there is no general and
> clear relationship between holding records and neither documents, nor
> items. In our catalogs we can find holding records that refer to
> multiple documents, holding records that refer to multiple items, and
> holding records that refer to one document with multiple items. Trying
> to get a clean mapping between holding records and document or item
> entities with URIs will require to bend the concept of a document and
> item as following:
>
> If we want all holding records to refer to exactely one item, there will
> be items that consist of multiple physical parts (as noted in Carstens
> mail).
>
> If we want all holding records to refer to exactely one document, there
> will be documents that consist span multiple objects (for instance a
> series is build of multiple parts).
>
> I think this bending is not a general problem, but it must be clear that
> it can be against the normal concepts of documents and items when
> talking to other people.
>
> By the way, I like Jörgs definition of an item, but I would remove the
> limitation to "the smallest thing" because Items can be connected to
> each other by part-of relationships.
>
> > In general, an item is the smallest thing the librarian can hand over
> > to a patron for reference, or for circulation. An item gets a single
> > shelfmark, and a single barcode (or a number, for inventory).
>
> Furthermore I would note that the single shelfmark, barcode, copy number
> etc. can be located in many different MARC fields or other locations.
> Carsten wrote:
>
>  > In all of the formats and standards like MARC, Z39.71, ZETA etc.
>  > there is always the possibility to subsume multiple Units/Items
>  > within one Holding.
>  >
>  > For instance the MARC Holding field 852 (Location) is repeatable.
>  > And in our union catalogue it is common that multiple Units with
>  > different locations, callnumbers and access restrictions are
>  > described in one holding record.
>
> Yes, there is no 1-to-1 relationship between holding records and items -
> but this is no problem if items have other identifiers but
> holding-record-ids. Frankly, I doubt that modeling holding records is of
> much use at all. Library holding records are old artifacts that one
> should get rid of when mapping holding data to RDF. Nobody is interested
> in the way that libraries tend to combine single or multiple documents
> and items in records.
>
> What really matters are documents and items. Or to put in the other way
> round: A holding record can be *anything* that describes or references
> one or multiple items, held by the same agent. For instance I can create
> an inventory of the books on my small shelf in the office as Excel list,
> so this list becomes a holding record.
>
> Jakob
>
> --
> Jakob Voß <jakob.voss at gbv.de>, skype: nichtich
> Verbundzentrale des GBV (VZG) / Common Library Network
> Platz der Goettinger Sieben 1, 37073 Göttingen, Germany
> +49 (0)551 39-10242, http://www.gbv.de
> _______________________________________________
> Dini-ag-kim-bestandsdaten mailing list
> Dini-ag-kim-bestandsdaten at lists.d-nb.de
> http://lists.d-nb.de/mailman/listinfo/dini-ag-kim-bestandsdaten

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.d-nb.de/pipermail/dini-ag-kim-bestandsdaten/attachments/20130618/b89d6dfc/attachment.html