Many thanks Corine!
On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 5:51 PM, Deliot, Corine <Corine.Deliot@bl.uk> wrote:
> Richard
>
> I've investigated this issue. As William points out, this has to do with
> the source data, not the RDF/XML representation or the conversion.
>
> The record you found was created prior to publication for the British
> National Bibliography (BNB), on the assumption that it would be published in
> the UK and would be part of the Library's legal deposit intake. It may worth
> pointing out that records created prior to publication, on the basis of
> information provided by the publisher, sometimes contain inaccurate data.
>
I think this shows how potentially complex some of this is
> The item was however published in the United States and was ineligible for
> the BNB. The BL subsequently purchased this item; this has been catalogued
> and correctly attributed. When I searched our "Search our catalogue" under
> the title "Presenting XML", your book was the first hit.
> http://searchbeta.bl.uk/
>
> We will take steps to delete the incorrect record from our catalogue but it
> will remain in our rdf/xml dataset until we update this data. William may
> want to delete it from his version of our data set.
>
My personal opinion (I'm not an expert) is that we shouldn't delete records
but rather mark them as {obsoleted} or something. It's possible that later
it's discovered that something else weird happend to this book and it's very
difficult to search for something that's been deleted.
But I'm sure others know more about this. I'm just so glad that it's already
sparked this discussion.
BTW - we are copied into 3 maillists - we should probably condense this.
P.
--
Peter Murray-Rust
Reader in Molecular Informatics
Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry
University of Cambridge
CB2 1EW, UK
+44-1223-763069
Received on Monday, 22 November 2010 18:14:12 UTC