And my reply that, although the concept of a "web publisher" is still very new, I
can't imagine that publishers will simply disappear from the web. Their power will,
most probably, increase over time.
Just because it is difficult to determine what "web publishers" are at this time,
changing the format is extremely short sighted, in my opinion. (I believe
"Creator-Contributor" could be a merged with little damage. But changing the format
at this stage is counterproductive.)
I produced examples (somewhere) where it has been very useful to differentiate
between the publisher of an item, and when the publisher has contributed to the
intellectual content of an item. Why do we think this won't happen in the future?
Jim Weinheimer
Princeton University
[log in to unmask]
David Bearman wrote:
> This is, by the way, why I once remember proposing that Agent and Role are
> more meaningful ways to slice the cake than the three DC fields...And why
> qualifying one of the three DC fields won't necessarily produce a
> consistent view...
> David
>
> At 08:59 AM 9/10/99 -0400, James Weinheimer wrote:
> >Alex Satrapa wrote:
> >
> >> Anthony Finkelstein wrote:
> >> > 7. if I make a resource available am I the publisher?
> >
> >> Apparently because publishing a work on a Web site costs nothing
> >> (besides your effort, hard drive space and your internet connection),
> >> you're not really publishing that work.
> >>
> >>
> >> But seriously, I'd consider that listing someone as a publisher only
> >> means that that person has given some authority to that work by
> >> presenting it to the public for consumption. Some people do have
> >> difficulty accepting publishing on the Internet as "real" publishing
> >> because there is no editorial or peer review, as there would be for a
> >> document in a scientific journal or newspaper - regardless of your
> >> status in presenting the work (eg: what's the difference between UCL
> >> presenting a work on their web site, and Jo Schmoe presenting a work on
> >> his web site?)
> >
> >I think Alex said this well. In "librarian-speak" there are differences among
> >"publisher" "printer" and "distributor". To put it succinctly, "publisher" has
> >something to do with intellectual content, "printer" with the physical
> >object, and
> >"distributor" with marketing rights. Of course, these functions can be
> >rolled into
> >one.
> >There are vanity publishers which amount to little more than printers (the
> >author
> >pays all costs for his book to be "published" along with any advertising,
> >etc.). In
> >the catalog, we handle these as "publishers." So, in your example, there is
> >little
> >choice but to put "University College London" as publisher.
> >Unfortunately, the rule is not quite so clear:
> >
> >"The intent of specifying this field is to identify the entity that provides
> >access
> >to the resource. If the Creator and Publisher are the same, do not repeat
> >the name
> >in the Publisher area. If the nature of the responsibility is ambiguous, the
> >recommended practice is to use Publisher for organizations, and Creator for
> >individuals. In cases of lesser responsibility, other than creation, use
> >Contributor."
> >
> >According to this rule, we are supposed to conflate Creator and Publisher in
> >certain
> >instances. Therefore, if you decided that the creator of your site were
> >"University
> >College London" (e.g. a college catalog) and it were also the publisher
> >(i.e. it is
> >located on the UCL server), you cannot use the name in <DC.Publisher>.
> >It is also unclear whether we are supposed to repeat an organization in
> ><DC.Publisher> if we also use it in <DC.Contributor>. The idea of playing down
> >corporate authorship is worrying to some of us in the field, e.g. preferring
> >"Publisher" to "Creator") There are also indexing concerns.
> >
> >This is the way catalogers read rules (I'm sure I haven't found everything
> >hidden in
> >this supposedly simple rule!) Maybe we're inbred, I don't know--but we are
> >forced to
> >read and interpret rules very exactly.
> > Jim Weinheimer
> > Princeton University
> > [log in to unmask]
> David Bearman
> President, Archives & Museum Informatics
> 2008 Murray Ave., Suite D
> Pittsburgh, PA 15217 USA
> +1-412-422-8530
> fax +1-412-422-8594
> [log in to unmask]
> http:///www.archimuse.com
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|