Date:         Wed, 23 Mar 2005 08:05:43 -0500
Reply-To:     Metadata Object Description Schema List <[log in to unmask]>
Sender:       Metadata Object Description Schema List <[log in to unmask]>
From:         Barbara B Tillett <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:      Re: MODS and FRBR
Comments: To: [log in to unmask]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Disposition: inline

I'd love to see more of a synergy between MODS and MADS, to use MADS for the work/expression level records/data elements (including classfication and subject headings).  I think David is on the right track with the Iliad being a work record (authority record).  Separate records (but linked) for the various expressions (translations, editions, performances, etc.) and again separate records (MODS this time) for the various manifestations (print in books and online, sound recordings on tapes and CDs, etc.) - Barbara Tillett

>>> [log in to unmask] 03/22/05 6:20 PM >>>
David,

Sounds like an intersting project with good, clean metadata that we would
all like to think we have.  How far did you want to go with FRBR?  Are you
thinking of splitting out the work information and expression information
into separate but linked records?  Were you thinking of going all the way
and putting subjects with the work record, for example?   We are interested
as we have been giving more thought to the fit between the FRBR and
MARC/MODS data.

In a paper last year on MODS for Library HiTech I did a gross breakdown by
looking back at the MARC to FRBR mapping that Tom Delsey did.  I came up
with the following for the MODS high level:

Work:  titleInfo type=uniform; name; genre; targetAudience; classification;
subject
Expression:  Type of resource; language; abstract; tableofContents
Manifestation: titleInfo; originInfo; physicalDescription; note;
identifier; relatedItem
Item:  location; accessCondition

But, at this point I could even argue with myself over the categorization
and obviously some elements can be in more than one, depending on the data.

Sally

At 11:58 AM 3/22/2005 -0500, you wrote:
>Hello,
>
>I am a programmer with the Perseus Digital Library at Tufts University. We
are
>in the process of rebuilding our site's catalog based on MODS records. We are
>particularly interested in FRBR because the nature of our materials is
already
>extremely hierarchical. In particular, we deal with multiple editions and
>translations of works (like "The Iliad"), as well as commentaries,
lexicons and
>other secondary materials that relate to works. The collection is not very
>large, and it is reasonably well organized: we already know which records are
>expressions of which works, and we even have standard, authorized IDs for
each
>work (based on the Thesaurus Linguae Grecae and related projects).
>
>What I have not been able to find in the literature is how to represent the
>relation between an expression and a work in MODS. Would there be a record
for
>the work "The Iliad" as well as records for a Greek edition and a particular
>English translation? Would the record for an English translation have two
><identifier> elements, one for the expression's ID and one for the work's
ID? Is
>there a standard way of declaring which is which? Would a given work be more
>like an authorized uniform title, with a MADS record?
>
>Thank you, and sorry if I have missed anything obvious!
>
>-David Mimno, Perseus Project
>

********************************************************
Sally H. McCallum, Chief, Network Development and
MARC Standards Office, Library of Congress
Washington, DC 20540   USA
[log in to unmask]    (Fax: 1-202-707 0115) (Voice: 1-202-707 5119)
********************************************************