In scope:
See :
http://www.cs.vassar.edu/faculty/welty/papers/subjects/subject.html.
This paper describes 4 alternative models, which are compliant with the
CRM methodology.
IFLA FRBR, Subject Relationships:
The "has as subject" relationship indicates that any of the entities in
the model, including work itself, may be the subject of a work. Stated in
slightly different terms, the relationship indicates that a work may be
about a concept, an object, an event, or place; it may be about a person
or corporate body; it may be about an expression, a manifestation, or an
item; it may be about another work. The logical connection between a work
and a related subject entity serves as the basis both for identifying the
subject of an individual work and for ensuring that all works relevant to
a given subject are linked to that subject.
Patrick LeBoeuf distinguishes:
The analysis (and indexing) of fine arts museum objects
might result into 2 kinds of relationships:
1) "ofness" relationships vs. "aboutness" relationships
2) Erwin Panofsky's categorizations: "pre-iconographic" indexing /
"iconographic" indexing / "iconologic" indexing.
As I tried to explain in my paper, librarians have constantly mistaken "object"
relationships for "subject" relationships; as long as they only dealt with
books, it was not very problematic, but from the moment they strove to catalog
still pictures and objects the same way, the whole thing became an indescribable
mess... I think librarians shouldn't pass on this mess to the CRM community!"
Proposal, Monterey Feb. 2002:
The CIDOC CRM should model only the aboutness
relationship.
Should be covered by decision on P67 refers to, issue
86
|
