Jenn,

You may want to consider how auction houses are now treated in the LC name
authorities.  Originally, auction houses were not qualified by place, even
though an auction house like Sotheby's have auction houses internationally.
 When bibliographic records for auction catalogs were converted from SCIPIO
records to MARC, there developed a problem with libraries maintaining
authority control since auction catalogs needed to use the individual
auction houses to identify specific catalogs. So now, the publisher /
auction house is qualified by place:

Sotheby's (Beverly Hills, Calif.)

In our projects, we use our institution as the publisher of the digital
object. For digitized books, publisher information was added to the
description/note or we added a call number that links to catalog record in
our Library Catalog (some the links were broken when we migrated to a new
ILS system)

The problem is the one-to-one issue which many of us do not follow: we
describe the original and the digital surrogate. But we kept thinking about
how each specific record would look if harvested and taken out of its local
context. In this case, we thought it was important to identify our
institution as the publisher of the digital object and not to confuse
matters by adding the publisher for the original object.

You might want to look at the work that the citation working group have
done. Our digital management software (CONTENTdm) allows us to make
hierarchical metadata: monograph. We can have metadata for the work as a
whole, and for the individual pages.

Mary Woodley
California State University, Northridge


---- Original message ----
>Date: Wed, 25 May 2005 20:50:38 -0500
>From: "Riley, Jenn" <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Publishing place in Simple DC?
>To: [log in to unmask]
>
>Hello all-
>
>Where should one put a publishing place in a *simple* Dublin Core
>record? I get the sense that including this information in the
><dc:publisher> element is common practice, especially in DC records
>created in a library environment where publishing place and publisher
>name are typically recorded together. But is that "best practice" from a
>DC perspective? The definition of <dc:publisher> explicitly refers to
>the entity itself, and the place where that entity conducts business is
>not the entity itself. What are the other options of places for this
>data to go? Does best practice differ if both the publisher and
>publishing place is known vs. if only the publishing place is known?
>
>One argument might be that publishing place is a property of a publisher
>and not of something published by that publishing entity. By that
>argument, publishing place doesn't belong in the record for the item at
>all but in the record for the publishing house. But I'm not entirely
>convinced by this argument. Publishing place is much more a property of
>a book than the birth place or date of the author of that book.
>
>Thanks in advance for any ideas,
>
>Jenn
>
>========================
>Jenn Riley
>Metadata Librarian
>Digital Library Program
>Indiana University - Bloomington
>Wells Library E170
>(812) 856-5759
>www.dlib.indiana.edu
>
>Inquiring Librarian blog: www.inquiringlibrarian.blogspot.com
*********************************************************
Mary S. Woodley, Ph.D.
Collection Development Coordinator
California State University, Northridge
Northridge CA 91330-8328
[log in to unmask]
voice (818) 677-2261 fax: (818) 677-4928
*********************************************************