2012
DOI: 10.1080/01639374.2012.680847
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Contribution of FRBR to the Identification of Bibliographic Relationships: The New RDA-Based Ways of Representing Relationships in Catalogs

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…There is no denying that when we adopt a more analytic approach and attempt describing, in any detail, semantic relationships expressed in photograph descriptions we quickly find ourselves explaining linguistic phenomenon. Recent trends in LIS show movement in this direction, formalizing relationships as objects of study and examining their symbolic representation and inference in knowledge organization (Benson, 2011a, b;Green, 2008); classifying web terms into thesauri relationships (Milonas, 2012); surveying attempts to classify relationships (Szostak, 2012); examining how relationships are represented in FRBR (Arsenault and Noruzi, 2012;Picco and Repiso, 2012); how FRBR can be used to define and clarify relationships in knowledge organization systems (Žumer et al, 2012); and mapping FRBR's bibliographic relationships to Tillett's taxonomy of bibliographic relationships .…”
Section: Conclusion and Directions For Future Researchmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There is no denying that when we adopt a more analytic approach and attempt describing, in any detail, semantic relationships expressed in photograph descriptions we quickly find ourselves explaining linguistic phenomenon. Recent trends in LIS show movement in this direction, formalizing relationships as objects of study and examining their symbolic representation and inference in knowledge organization (Benson, 2011a, b;Green, 2008); classifying web terms into thesauri relationships (Milonas, 2012); surveying attempts to classify relationships (Szostak, 2012); examining how relationships are represented in FRBR (Arsenault and Noruzi, 2012;Picco and Repiso, 2012); how FRBR can be used to define and clarify relationships in knowledge organization systems (Žumer et al, 2012); and mapping FRBR's bibliographic relationships to Tillett's taxonomy of bibliographic relationships .…”
Section: Conclusion and Directions For Future Researchmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Tillett in her taxonomy often uses the bibliographic item term to describe the participants in a relationship. This term is not used in the list below, but it has been replaced by the FRBR/RDA entities, which may participate in each one of these relationships (IFLA Study Group on the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records, 2009; IFLA Working Group on Functional Requirements and Numbering of Authority Records (FRANAR), 2013; Picco & Ortiz Repiso, 2012). Tillett identified the following seven types of bibliographic relationships (Tillett, 1987), which are also depicted in Figure 2:5 with different colors to denote if they refer to content or structure: It must be noted that the treatment of literal translations as derivations of the same Work is a common approach in libraries, known as "realization approach".…”
Section: 121mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Legacy cataloging-generated implicit representations of families using uniform-titles have been proved as inadequate (Carlyle, Ranger, & Summerlin, 2008;. Their explicit representation will ensure that bibliographic data may transcend the limits of flat bibliographic records and closed library catalogs, and that they may interact with third-party data openly available through the Web (Coyle, 2010a;Picco & Ortiz Repiso, 2012). Thus, the vision of a library linked data universe may become real, where researchers and web users will be able to easily navigate through bibliographic data using families and relationships as linking mechanisms.…”
Section: Bibliographic Familiesmentioning
confidence: 99%