Reading through the initial part of the FRBR document, I couldn’t help but wonder how much this level of distinction is necessary. Truthfully, I keep coming back to that with a lot of the readings. Adding a metaphor level of linguistic terminology seemed less helpful than it seemed to just add to the muddle.
Stepping away from it momentarily, that kept coming back to pester my thoughts. All this naming of the parts and their distinction seems like unnecessary clarification that could be made more straightforward with a certain assumption of common sense. I think that thing that finally allowed me to let it go and move on, was the state of my office email. Maybe a person has the ability to think of these acts as singular, but parsing it up helps a lot for analysis of your process (which might show room for improvement) as well as helps pinpoint the exact source of a problem-child type of issue. The former case is, I think one of the benefits of FRBR – keeping in mind these components when the catalog world in the digital age is growing through somewhat of an awkward stage.