On 3/29/06, Breton Slivka <<a href="mailto:zen@zenpsycho.com">zen@zenpsycho.com</a>> wrote:<div> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> Then we have properties that are specific to books/journals Pages Volume If these properties are present, then we know that this item is probably not say.. a photo or a painting, and contains all the properties which allow it to be pased the same whether it's a book or a journal. Combine it with hCite and suddenly we have bookCite</blockquote><div> I just want to point out that ambiguity might not be bad for determining what an item isn't, but it's not good practice for determining what an item is. I am currently going through our 705k marc records trying to determine what each record actually is representing and if it's not explicitly set (which is sadly really only done with conference proceedings and journals) it becomes a guessing game as what these things really are.  In my case, I can probably actually find the thing and determine what it is (although that won't scale, obviously), but a citation I might find on the web won't afford me that. Explicitly stating what an item is a much sounder approach. -Ross.</div></div>