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  December 2012

BIBFRAME December 2012

Subject:

Re: Early Experimentation Code Available

From:

Philip Schreur <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

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

Date:

Fri, 7 Dec 2012 16:53:53 -0800

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (123 lines)

Hi Karen,

Let me think over the weekend.  We have a good sized set of RDA records 
in all formats.  It would make an interesting dataset to work from.

Phil

On 12/7/12 4:06 PM, Karen Coyle wrote:
> Phil,
>
> If you have a reasonably easy way to put up files of input and output, 
> I think that would help people visualize the model. I'm intending to 
> do so myself but I'm still in the process of getting software installed.
>
> kc
>
> On 12/7/12 2:48 PM, Ford, Kevin wrote:
>> Dear Phil,
>>
>> Great to hear that the code worked for you.
>>
>>> One question, how would you like
>>> comments/questions sent in?
>> -- Asking this question makes me fear the answer.  Post to the 
>> listserv.  If it's a bug, we can dispense with it quickly, but it 
>> might be a bigger issue for discussion.
>>
>>> the 700s for additional authors are being attached to the Instance not
>>> the Work.
>> -- This is actually by design.  In part this is because we've not 
>> divied up the relators codes and associated them with BIBFRAME Works 
>> or Instances, thereby allowing us to determine with which resource 
>> (the Work or Instance) the name is associated.  For example, I would 
>> think an Actor or a Puppeteer be associated with an Instance versus a 
>> Work.  And we've not divied up the relators, in part, because we (LC) 
>> do not have a lot of relators codes in our data (a hair under 800K, 
>> to be precise) so it has lacked some immediacy (in these early dev 
>> days).  And, again because we do not have a lot of relators codes in 
>> our data, it becomes even more difficult to determine with which 
>> resource (Work or Instance) the name is related. Look at a music or 
>> moving image resource and suddenly all those 700s and 710s being 
>> associated with BIBFRAME Instance resources make perfect sense.
>>
>> Now, if you have records that have employed relators codes, rest 
>> assured that any names with relators codes like "cre" or "aut" will 
>> be associated with the Work. Is that the case?
>>
>> Regardless, your overall point is taken.  Not all 700s and 710s 
>> should be associated with BIBFRAME Instance resources, and should 
>> instead be with the Work.  *That* is going to take some figuring out.
>>
>> Warmly,
>>
>> Kevin
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Philip Schreur [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
>>> Sent: Friday, December 07, 2012 4:55 PM
>>> To: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum
>>> Cc: Ford, Kevin
>>> Subject: Re: [BIBFRAME] Early Experimentation Code Available
>>>
>>> Kevin,
>>>
>>> Thanks so much for making this available!  Since we've been cataloging
>>> in RDA from when testing began, it'll be fun to take all of the records
>>> and do a conversion.  One question, how would you like
>>> comments/questions sent in?  For instance (we used the XQuery version),
>>> the 700s for additional authors are being attached to the Instance not
>>> the Work.  In our first example, they were compilers and I thought
>>> there may have been some confusion there but in the second they were
>>> just straightforward authors.
>>>
>>> Phil
>>>
>>> On 12/7/2012 7:04 AM, Ford, Kevin wrote:
>>>> We're making code available that will permit programmers and
>>> developers to better understand how MARC Bibliographic records can
>>> transform to BIBFRAME resources.  The code is available at:
>>>> https://github.com/lcnetdev/marc2bibframe
>>>>
>>>> There are two versions: one in Python and one in XQuery. The Python
>>> version produces JSON files for viewing in a Simile Exhibit
>>> presentation (also included).  The XQuery version outputs RDF (as
>>> RDF/XML, N-triples, or JSON).  Although the Python code expects to be
>>> invoked from the command line, the XQuery code can be invoked using
>>> Oxygen XML or the Eclipse IDE, in addition to a few other methods.
>>>> The XQuery is the product of Network Development and MARC Standards
>>> staff at LC; the Python version is the work of Zepheira.  The two
>>> transformations were developed independently of each other. They
>>> therefore do not "split" MARC Bibliographic records into BIBFRAME 
>>> Works,
>>> Instances, Authorities, and Annotations in the exact same way.
>>>> Both are subject to change.  Neither is canonical.  They are very
>>> much works in progress.  As such, the names of properties and
>>> classes/entities are in flux and will invariably change in many cases.
>>> Sometimes, developers just need to do something to keep going, even if
>>> it is subject to alteration later (and often is modified).
>>> Nevertheless, we want to make these available for evaluation and to
>>> stimulate further conversation.
>>>> We are presently working on a way to better expose the output of
>>> these transformations to a wider audience.  In the next several weeks,
>>> we hope to provide a service that will permit individuals to submit
>>> their own batch of MARC Bibliographic records for transformation.  This
>>> way, you can see what *your* data might look like conforming to the
>>> BIBFRAME model.
>>>>
>>>> -- 
>>>> Kevin Ford
>>>> Network Development and MARC Standards Office Library of Congress
>>>> Washington, DC
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Philip E. Schreur
>>> Head, Metadata Department
>>> Stanford University
>>> 650-723-2454
>>> 650-725-1120 (fax)
>

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

November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
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