LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ZNG Archives


ZNG Archives

ZNG Archives


[email protected]


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ZNG Home

ZNG Home

ZNG  February 2014

ZNG February 2014

Subject:

Re: Antw: Re: SRU recordPacking and JSON

From:

Jörg Prante <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

SRU (Search and Retrieve Via URL) Implementors

Date:

Mon, 24 Feb 2014 10:28:32 +0100

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (357 lines)

Does that mean that Bibframe over SRU could follow a variety of
ontologies, and a preference of one ontology could be enforced by the
SRU client?

At the moment I assume the semantic model at http://bibframe.org/vocab/
will still be the only valid ontology for Bibframe.

Rendering Bibframe to JSON or XML according to a schema (or rewriting
the XML result to JSON like in
http://oclc.org/developer/content/marc-json-draft-2010-03-11 )
must not be confused with RDF graph serialization which is declared by
content type application/rdf+xml or application/ld+json. The output of
the latter looks like JSON or XML but the underlying semantic model is
definitely not the same.

In Z39.50, and SRU, server and client have to agree upon an common
semantic model, to make sure the interpretation of the data is the same
(to recognize "bibliographic data"). Given that Bibframe in SRU means
the transport of RDF graphs from server to client, the semantic model is
already in place. The formal description is at
http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-mt/ and the onotology is also transported
embedded in the RDF graph, by using references to
http://bibframe.org/vocab/ 

With Bibframe, walking the same rendering path as in MARC would lead to
some more challenges, just to mention there is no more a concept of
records in Bibframe, so the sequential order of SRU records does not
naturally match the concept of Bibframe resource URIs organized in RDF
graphs.

Jörg

>>> Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]> schrieb am 20.02.2014 um 18.37 Uhr in
Nachricht
<019e01cf2e62$6d00dec0$47029c40$@gov>:
> "So, for Bibframe data, it's all in place."
> 
>  
> 
> You mean by "bibframe data", I presume, that you've stored your data
as 
> bibframe and are prepared to supply it as bibframe, just tell me
whether you 
> want it in xml, json, etc.  Fine, that’s one model.
> 
>   
> 
> But that isn't the model I'm talking about: you have bibliographic
data, how 
> it is stored is unspecified, and you are prepared to supply it
according to a 
> variety of schemas/ontologies (mods, marcxml, bibframe, modsrdf,
....).
> 
>  
> 
> Ray
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
> 
>> From: SRU (Search and Retrieve Via URL) Implementors
> 
>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jörg Prante
> 
>> Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2014 11:49 AM
> 
>> To: [log in to unmask]
> 
>> Subject: Re: Antw: Re: SRU recordPacking and JSON
> 
>> 
> 
>> RDF is a model, the semantics of RDF statements are defined in
> 
>> ontologies, and not a priori in MIME content types.
> 
>> 
> 
>> It would be tedious to register for every RDF ontology a MIME
content
> 
>> type, if you look at  <http://lov.okfn.org/dataset/lov/> 
> http://lov.okfn.org/dataset/lov/ there can be
> 
>> plenty of them in just one document, and there are no limits.
> 
>> 
> 
>> One fundamental concept of RDF ontologies is the open world
assumption
> 
>> (OWA).
> 
>> 
> 
>> The recipe for RDF graph retrieval with OWA is: send a request to a
web
> 
>> service (like SRU), ask for content negotiation for your favorite
RDF
> 
>> serialization with the Accept header, read the response, parse it
> 
>> accordingly to the Content-Type header, iterate through the RDF
graph
> 
>> (the triples), and optionally, the "follow-your-nose" principle
takes
> 
>> you to everywhere else on the Web, for example, the ontologies you
want
> 
>> to examine, or other links. And Bibframe is just one ontology of
many
> 
>> in an RDF graph serialization.
> 
>> 
> 
>> So, for Bibframe data, it's all in place.
> 
>> 
> 
>> Best,
> 
>> 
> 
>> Jörg
> 
>> 
> 
>> 
> 
>> >>> "LeVan,Ralph" < <mailto:[log in to unmask]> [log in to unmask]> schrieb
am 20.02.2014 
> um 16.30 Uhr
> 
>> in Nachricht
> 
>> < 
>
<mailto:[log in to unmask]
>om>
[log in to unmask]
> 
>  
>
<mailto:[log in to unmask]
>om> > m>:
> 
>> > Nope.
> 
>> >
> 
>> > RDF is much more syntax than semantics.  It's triples.  It
doesn't
> 
>> tell you
> 
>> > any more about what you're going to get than asking for XML does.
> 
>> >
> 
>> > Surely you don't think that the triples would be identical if you
> 
>> asked for
> 
>> > schemadotorg+rdf or foaf+rdf or rda+rdf or vnd.oclc.viaf+rdf. 
Those
> 
>> are
> 
>> > schemas with completely different semantics, even if they use an
> 
>> identical
> 
>> > syntax.
> 
>> >
> 
>> > Yes, there will need to be some agreement on how you ask a site
for
> 
>> Bibframe
> 
>> > data.  Probably a topic for the Bibframe folks.
> 
>> >
> 
>> > Ralph
> 
>> >
> 
>> > -----Original Message-----
> 
>> > From: SRU (Search and Retrieve Via URL) Implementors
> 
>> > [ <mailto:[log in to unmask]> mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of 
> Jörg Prante
> 
>> > Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2014 3:40 AM
> 
>> > To:  <mailto:[log in to unmask]> [log in to unmask]
> 
>> > Subject: Antw: Re: SRU recordPacking and JSON
> 
>> >
> 
>> > There is no need for a Bibframe experimental media type. Bibframe
> 
>> model
> 
>> > is a subset of RDF. So we already have
> 
>> >
> 
>> > application/rdf+xml
> 
>> > application/ld+json
> 
>> > text/n3
> 
>> > text/turtle
> 
>> >
> 
>> >  <http://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/media-types.xhtml> 
> http://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/media-types.xhtml
> 
>> >
> 
>> >  <http://tools.ietf.org/search/rfc6838#section-4.2> 
> http://tools.ietf.org/search/rfc6838#section-4.2
> 
>> >
> 
>> > "While it is possible for a given media type to be assigned
> 
>> additional
> 
>> > names, the use of different names to identify the same media type
is
> 
>> > discouraged."
> 
>> >
> 
>> > Jörg
> 
>> >
> 
>> >>>> "LeVan,Ralph" < <mailto:[log in to unmask]> [log in to unmask]> schrieb
am 20.02.2014 
> um 3.00 Uhr
> 
>> in
> 
>> > Nachricht
> 
>> >
> 
>> < 
>
<mailto:[log in to unmask]
>om>
[log in to unmask]
> 
>  
>
<mailto:[log in to unmask]
>om> > m>:
> 
>> >> No, there is the concept of experimental media types that can be
> 
>> used
> 
>> > between
> 
>> >> consenting adults.
> 
>> >  <http://www.mhonarc.org/~ehood/MIME/2046/rfc2046.html#6> 
> http://www.mhonarc.org/~ehood/MIME/2046/rfc2046.html#6.
> 
>> >> So, X-application/bibframe+xml;q=0.00 :) No need to seek
standards
> 
>> > approval
> 
>> >> for that.
> 
>> >
> 
>> >
> 
>> >
> 
>> >
> 
>> > --
> 
>> > Jörg Prante
> 
>> > hbz, Gruppe Portale
> 
>> > - Digitale Bibliothek und Online-Fernleihe - Postfach 270451,
50510
> 
>> > Köln, Deutschland Telefon +49-221-40075-156, Fax
+49-221-40075-190
> 
>> >  <mailto:[log in to unmask]> [log in to unmask] 
<http://www.hbz-nrw.de> 
> http://www.hbz-nrw.de
> 
>> 
> 
>> 
> 
>> 
> 
>> 
> 
>> --
> 
>> Jörg Prante
> 
>> hbz, Gruppe Portale
> 
>> - Digitale Bibliothek und Online-Fernleihe - Postfach 270451, 50510
> 
>> Köln, Deutschland Telefon +49-221-40075-156, Fax +49-221-40075-190
> 
>>  <mailto:[log in to unmask]> [log in to unmask] 
<http://www.hbz-nrw.de> 
> http://www.hbz-nrw.de




-- 
Jörg Prante
hbz, Gruppe Portale
- Digitale Bibliothek und Online-Fernleihe -
Postfach 270451, 50510 Köln, Deutschland
Telefon +49-221-40075-156, Fax +49-221-40075-190
[log in to unmask]
http://www.hbz-nrw.de

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

July 2017
October 2016
July 2016
August 2014
February 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
February 2013
January 2013
October 2012
August 2012
April 2012
January 2012
October 2011
May 2011
April 2011
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager