<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Is the ISBN Still Necessary?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.thelateageofprint.org/2009/08/14/is-isbn-still-necessary/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.thelateageofprint.org/2009/08/14/is-isbn-still-necessary/</link>
	<description>Beyond the Book</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Sep 2010 02:01:31 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Andrew Shaffer</title>
		<link>http://www.thelateageofprint.org/2009/08/14/is-isbn-still-necessary/comment-page-1/#comment-1386</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrew Shaffer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Aug 2009 21:01:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelateageofprint.org/?p=436#comment-1386</guid>
		<description>I am assuming that Amazon has, of course, ditched UPC barcodes for their Kindle editions--so they are doing away with two unique identifiers that most print books have these days. My question is, why haven&#039;t UPC barcodes made ISBNs redundant in the publishing world?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am assuming that Amazon has, of course, ditched UPC barcodes for their Kindle editions&#8211;so they are doing away with two unique identifiers that most print books have these days. My question is, why haven&#8217;t UPC barcodes made ISBNs redundant in the publishing world?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: links for 2009-08-26 : Bibliothekarisch.de</title>
		<link>http://www.thelateageofprint.org/2009/08/14/is-isbn-still-necessary/comment-page-1/#comment-1373</link>
		<dc:creator>links for 2009-08-26 : Bibliothekarisch.de</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Aug 2009 06:08:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelateageofprint.org/?p=436#comment-1373</guid>
		<description>[...] Is the ISBN Still Necessary? — The Late Age of Print Over the last several years there has been a noticeable movement away from the ISBN, particularly in the case of e-books. Leading the way has been Amazon.com, which refuses to assign ISBNs to any of the Kindle books it sells. With book digitization there has also tended to follow dis-aggregation, or the chopping up of books into smaller, component parts that can be sold separately. How do you assign a single ISBN to what’s fast becoming an exploding whole? (tags: publishing isbn ebook Kindle amazon fragestellung 08/2009 2009) [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Is the ISBN Still Necessary? — The Late Age of Print Over the last several years there has been a noticeable movement away from the ISBN, particularly in the case of e-books. Leading the way has been Amazon.com, which refuses to assign ISBNs to any of the Kindle books it sells. With book digitization there has also tended to follow dis-aggregation, or the chopping up of books into smaller, component parts that can be sold separately. How do you assign a single ISBN to what’s fast becoming an exploding whole? (tags: publishing isbn ebook Kindle amazon fragestellung 08/2009 2009) [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Horst</title>
		<link>http://www.thelateageofprint.org/2009/08/14/is-isbn-still-necessary/comment-page-1/#comment-1355</link>
		<dc:creator>Horst</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Aug 2009 10:47:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thelateageofprint.org/?p=436#comment-1355</guid>
		<description>To catalogue media, you still need a unique identifier for each item to make sure it&#039;s clear which edition/printing/version you are referring to (cf. Dublin Core&#039;s dc:identifier element). Why invent a new kind of identifier when the ISBN already exists and does the job perfectly?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To catalogue media, you still need a unique identifier for each item to make sure it&#8217;s clear which edition/printing/version you are referring to (cf. Dublin Core&#8217;s dc:identifier element). Why invent a new kind of identifier when the ISBN already exists and does the job perfectly?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
