On 05/07/2013 12:47, Tom Adamich wrote:
This record from the El Paso Public Library
Thanks, but this record you cite is for physical items. For physical items, I have already said that, of course there is a need for manifestations to organize the different copies. (I still prefer to use the word “edition”) This is why I said in my message, to provide examples where there are copies in the digital realm. There are not multiple copies of the New York Times stored in various places on the internet. There may be different versions of the New York Times, e.g. epub, pdf, some tablet formats, and so on, but each of those would be a different manifestation. Ultimately, each manifestation has a single item. Everyone looks at the same files (or item). In earlier messages, I mentioned possibilities of the Wayback Machine of the Internet Archive, and BitTorrents and noted that both would have serious problems if catalogers are to consider them to be “duplicates” to be managed.
In the physical world, everything is based on creating copies, and these copies need to be organized and managed. That is the very purpose of the manifestation record: to organize and manage duplicates. Where there are no duplicates, as on the internet, there is no need for manifestation records. This is similar to manuscript cataloging where–by definition–there can never be a duplicate.