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

Klee, Carsten Carsten.Klee at sbb.spk-berlin.de
Tue Jun 18 14:16:31 CEST 2013


Hi Jakob et al.!

I see your point about the generality of the concept 'item'.

I just wanted to get a clear understanding of all the terms that fly around. And therefore I tried to distinguish and relate them, not saying that we have to model it like this.

On the other hand I had in mind that there is the need for saying something on a level above the "thing the librarian can hand over to a patron".

So I have my own little fight with the terms and definitions. But in the end we have to say what an item is. Sorry to stress this issue!  

And what is an item? Obviously it is more than the "thing the librarian can hand over to a patron". When I replace 'holding' with 'item' in Jakobs definition [1] than it reads "An item is a particular copy of a document that is held by, provided and/or made available by someone". And this corresponds with my holding definition "A description of one agents inventory information and/or access information for an item."

In terms of ontology there might be a 'holding ontology' and a class 'Item'? And the subject of a Holding (Item description) is always one specific Item.

This means that there is no explicit differentiation of logical and physical structures. Chronologies, locations and access information can be applied to an Item regardless of its structure.

Wow, is it that simple? What was I thinking.

Cheers,

Carsten
   
[1] <https://wiki.dnb.de/display/DINIAGKIM/Definition+of+Holding>


More information about the Dini-ag-kim-bestandsdaten mailing list