LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for BIBFRAME Archives


BIBFRAME Archives

BIBFRAME Archives


BIBFRAME@LISTSERV.LOC.GOV


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

BIBFRAME Home

BIBFRAME Home

BIBFRAME  November 2012

BIBFRAME November 2012

Subject:

Re: Work issues

From:

"Ford, Kevin" <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Fri, 30 Nov 2012 13:33:14 -0500

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (78 lines)

> Looking at the described conversion procedures and the RDF example
> somehow I get the feeling that BIBFRAME Works will be treated as local
> redundant entities. I hope I'm wrong. Of course the BIBFRAME model can
> be implemented in a number of ways, both as local silo and as globally
> shared data. But I had the impression that 'based on linked data' meant
> abolition of redundancy by linking instead of copying/duplicating, not
> just using RDF as storage format.
-- This describes an implementation challenge.  Individual libraries and consortiums will likely all come to different solutions.  Minimally, I think it is too early to say anything definitive.  But, as you surmise, and I think this is the right direction, the BIBFRAME model enables both options: individual silos and globally shared data.  *How* we use BIBFRAME with respect to this issue remains to be determined.

> Rather, all Instances of a specific Work would obviously have one link
> to that Work.
-- Right, and that actually is how Zepheira created the model.  So that we could begin testing with the model immediately with the systems we have, we created a property that permitted use to link from a Work resource *to* an Instance (versus *only* the other way around).  Maybe the idea remains in the final version of the model, maybe not, but it allowed us to develop a workable system more rapidly while putting aside the "ideal" for a moment.  It is handy, but could very quickly become a maintenance challenge.  

Yours,

Kevin




> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Lukas Koster
> Sent: Friday, November 30, 2012 12:19 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: [BIBFRAME] Work issues
> 
> After watching Kevin Ford's SWIB12 presentation recording and slides
> http://3windmills.com/kefo-swib12-bfi/ I have some questions about the
> nature of the Work class.
> 
> Kevin talks about the conversion process, conversion tools, splitting
> of MARC records, etc. And there is an example of a BIBFRAME RDF
> representation of a resulting Work.
> 
> Looking at the described conversion procedures and the RDF example
> somehow I get the feeling that BIBFRAME Works will be treated as local
> redundant entities. I hope I'm wrong. Of course the BIBFRAME model can
> be implemented in a number of ways, both as local silo and as globally
> shared data. But I had the impression that 'based on linked data' meant
> abolition of redundancy by linking instead of copying/duplicating, not
> just using RDF as storage format.
> 
> Ideally, a Work would be described only once, and as such be similar to
> an authority record to which links are made from Instances and
> Annotations. Of course in the real world we will have a limited number
> of redundant Work data stores. For this we would use "sameAs"
> relationships.
> 
> In Kevin's RDF example I see however four Instance URIs, which would
> only make sense if this is a local library 'record' containing links to
> all local holdings of the work (FRBR Manifestations, originating from
> local legacy MARC records).
> A globally shared Work entity would of course never be able to hold
> links to all Instances existing in the world. This would not make any
> sense at all. A Work would not contain any Instance links at all.
> Rather, all Instances of a specific Work would obviously have one link
> to that Work.
> The only use for links to Instances in a Work would be to indicate
> provenance, which already is taken care of by the 'derivedFrom' and
> 'consolidates' links in the example.
> 
> Anyway, I would expect libraries only to be dealing with Annotations
> for their own local holdings, linking, in their own new linked data
> ready systems, to existing Instances (FRBR Manifestations) made
> available by authorities such as LoC, OCLC, publishers, etc.
> Of course, Works and Instances might be available for editing by other
> trusted parties in a wikipedia way.
> 
> 
> Lukas Koster
> Library Systems Coordinator
> Library and Information Systems Department Library of the University of
> Amsterdam
> Web: http://uba.uva.nl
> Mobile site: http://m.uba.uva.nl
> Digital Library: http://lib.uva.nl

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

June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
July 2011
June 2011

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager