Page 25 - 4188

23

These are quite difficult issues philosophically, and pose real
practical problems, for example, for library cataloguing codes and
systems. They have led to the Functional Requirements for
Bibliographic Records (FRBR) model, which is beginning to make an

impact on cataloguing systems and practices (IFLA,
1998). FRBR distinguishes four levels work, expression, manifestation
and item spanning the “space” from an abstract intellectual conception

to a specific physical item, the “book in hand”. All of these are arguably
documents in some sense, and there has been scope for much
disagreement on how these four levels should be understood (see, for
example, Jonsson, 2003). It seems that much of this ambiguity stems

from the basic question of what is a document and, similarly, what is a
“work” (see, for example, Smiraglia, 2002, 2003).
Definition and explanation of terms is sometimes seen as a rather

sterile activity, particularly in a subject with a strong practical and
vocational component. This is, I consider, far from the case here. What
we understand by a “document”, and how this understanding changes

over time, has great effects on the principles and practices of the
information sciences, and the practical disciplines which they underpin.
It is a topic that this journal will continue to devote space to, and we

welcome contributions both full articles and shorter contributions which
contribute to its debate.

ASSIGNMENTS

1. What does the term ‘document’ mean?
2. Why are “information” and “knowledge” tricky concepts?
3. What is the difference between document and information?

4. What problems are caused by generalization of the term ‘document’?
5. How has the role of the library changed? The tables below may be
helpful.