Jakob Voss wrote:
In addition you can harvest the Semantic Web for expressions that other people have created. The rest only depends on nice interfaces that people can use for to manage FRBR statements.
This is one of the big problems, as I mentioned in an earlier message. Is this creating what our *patrons* want, or is it creating something that *we* want? A place to begin discussion is Fiction Finder at: http://fictionfinder.oclc.org/
I can’t make any links to individual records because it uses session cookies, but just enter it, click on something in the tag cloud, and look at an individual record for an FRBR view. (I’m looking at Dicken’s David Copperfield) For those who understand, you can see the work (at the top), expressions (by language and formats), and multiple manifestations, linking into records into WorldCat. I think OCLC has done a very good job of making it as clear as possible, and easy to navigate.
But I repeat my question, which I think is vital: does this give our patrons what they want and need? Or do they need something else, such as links into Google Books, into the Internet Archive, into selected websites, into entertainment and educational videos and lectures, conferences, scholarly websites, reviews, ratings, Wikipedia, dbpedia and who knows what else? Who would choose to use the displays and functions found in Fiction Finder over, e.g. LibraryThing?
I realize that at basis, the FRBR displays create what library catalogs have been trying to achieve for over 100 years, and it’s interesting to see it now. I just don’t know how relevant the “find/select/identify/obtain –> works/expressions/manifestations/items –> by their authors/titles/subjects/standard numbers” is to the information universe of today.
Now that libraries are facing such difficult times and rethinking how to best apportion library resources, labor, and intellectual capital, I think these questions eventually will have to be addressed and answered, and perhaps sooner than we think.