- From: Ross Singer <ross.singer@talis.com>
- Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 10:02:48 -0500
- To: Richard Light <richard@light.demon.co.uk>
- Cc: "Young,Jeff (OR)" <jyoung@oclc.org>, Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>, public-lld@w3.org
On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 5:06 PM, Richard Light <richard@light.demon.co.uk> wrote: > Well yes, correct. But that's precisely my point: whatever basis was used > to arrive at that position, they have been assigned different URLs, and ipso > facto it is asserted that they are distinct entities. I have no view on > what would count as sufficient information to arrive at that conclusion > (although the raft of different properties would seem to make it a > no-brainer in this case). > Richard, I'm not sure I understand. They've been assigned different URLs because they're different records. The problem is, we don't *why* it's a different record. I don't think it's a "no-brainer" - the raft of different properties could easily appear because they're different editions (and, therefore different Manifestations of the same Expression) or simply because the records were entered by different people/organizations. -Ross.
Received on Wednesday, 9 March 2011 15:03:21 UTC