On 1/28/13 10:04 AM, Trail, Nate wrote:
> We're leaning toward not having punctuation in the data, so you're seeing that. In some cases, stripping it out causes problems, so we don't have a perfect algorithm for that...sigh. The order of the properties is not meant to be "display order"; we think systems should be able to bring in the data and do whatever is appropriate for a given display/use. In fact in RDF, maintaing order is not simple anyway.
I've stumbled over this in multiple projects, most recently some work on
Dublin Core Application Profiles. I think that in a true RDF environment
we will use semantics rather than order of data to express meaning.
Unfortunately, MARC leans heavily on order (as does ISBD, which it
supports) to provide meaning, rather than meaning to provide order. This
is one of the reasons why I am skeptical about the emphasis on
transitioning MARC as opposed to an analysis of what would work better
in the future. I understand the impetus behind the emphasis on MARC, but
I think it's something that we need to overcome if we are to make real
progress. My impression is that if every time we run into this "order"
problem we turn it on its head into a "meaning" problem, we will find a
solution.
kc
> You'll find that a lot of MARC data elements are missing, but in many cases it's because we're still just setting up the systems for transforming from MARC. I've got the 00X fields in process right now, as well as 400, 800...
>
> I presume at some point we'll say, "that's it from MARC", and then we'd like to hear about your favorite missing field and your passionate case for including it.
>
> Nate
>
> Nate Trail
> LS/TECH/NDMSO
> Library of Congress
> [log in to unmask]
> 202-707-2193
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of J. McRee Elrod
> Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2013 5:26 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [BIBFRAME] Announcement: bibframe.org
>
>> http://bibframe.org/ - a new website for detailed information about the
>> in-development, draft BIBFRAME vocabulary.
>
> Interesting.
>
> I assume the demonstration displays are not determined by the Bibframe
> markup? I would find the displays awkward to say the least. Why no
> punctuation in imprint? The break up of collation is confusing, e.g., why size before pagination, and why ISBN before either? I would find a simple ISBD display far easier to comprehend. Let's don't reinvent a well working wheel.
>
> The Bibframe markup seems to be less granular than MARC, e.g., no code for GMD. How would content/media/carrier terms be automatically substituted for GMD, if GMD is not separately coded?
>
> Nowhere do I see fixed field information preserved; wouldn't at least some of that information be needed for determining RDA media terms?
>
>
>
> __ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod ([log in to unmask])
> {__ | / Special Libraries Cataloguing HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
> ___} |__ \__________________________________________________________
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> It also includes
>> demonstrations of the BIBFRAME model from MARC bibliographic records
> >from all of the experimenters' collections, including the Library of Congress.
>> These are displayed in a human-friendly manner with Exhibit3, a
>> light-weight publishing framework for data. The source MARC/XML data,
>> resulting BIBFRAME resources, and Exhibit JSON are available for download.
>>
>> The website also provides services that permit librarians interested in
>> what bibliographic resources might look like conforming to the BIBFRAME
>> data model to view MARC/XML records from the Library of Congress's main
>> database along side BIBFRAME resources resulting from the most current
>> transformation. Another tool allows users to submit their own MARC/XML
>> records for transformation. The data resulting from these
>> transformations are also displayed with Exhibit3 and the resulting data available for download.
>>
>> It is important to understand that the vocabulary is a draft. It will
>> continue to evolve, sometimes rapidly in the coming months. The code
>> performing the transformations is also a work in progress. Users may
>> note that the names of classes/properties/elements/attributes in the
>> vocabulary do not match those seen in the BIBFRAME data. We will be
>> working in the next couple of weeks to bring the names of
>> classes/properties/elements/attributes seen in the resulting data into
>> alignment with the terms found in the vocabulary.
>>
>> We encourage and want constructive feedback on the vocabulary and data
>> transformations. All are invited to join the conversation. This
>> listserv is the best place for those discussions. The vocabulary is
>> designed to get us started, but, as a community effort, your valuable
>> feedback is essential (and has been already - thank you).
>>
>> One last note: the website is also very much a work in progress. There may
>> be bugs (errors) with the website - a result of rapid, iterative
>> development
>> - and until we can establish a mechanism to report such errors, please
>> feel free to email Kevin Ford ([log in to unmask]).
>>
>> --
>> Kevin Ford
>> Network Development and MARC Standards Office Library of Congress
>> Washington, DC
>>
--
Karen Coyle
[log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net
ph: 1-510-540-7596
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet
|