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  March 2013

BIBFRAME March 2013

Subject:

Re: BIBFRAME Digest - 12 Mar 2013 to 13 Mar 2013 (#2013-49)

From:

Carol Bream <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

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

Date:

Thu, 14 Mar 2013 07:28:02 +0000

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (4238 lines)

Hi

An example of re-use of vocabularies that has been successful:

I've had some experience recently in the Working Group that drew up a metadata schema for asset description - ADMS. Members took the view that 
ADMS specification should reuse existing metadata vocabularies and core vocabularies rather than mapping. These include:

The Dublin Core Metadata Element Set (DCMES)[9] 
The Data Catalog Vocabulary (DCAT) [10] 
The Friend of a Friend (FOAF) Ontology 
The vCard Ontology [11]  


The 'specification' is in the process of being validated by the W3C Government Linked Data (GLD) Working Group and is already in use. Using existing ontologies simplifies and provides for better inter-operability.

You can find the community and assets on http://joinup.ec.europa.eu/asset/all , including those provided from the metadata registry of the Publications Office of the European Union. http://publications.europa.eu/mdr/authority/corporate-body/index.html


Carol
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carol Bream
Team Co-ordinator Library Applications, Thesaurus and Réseaubib

European Commission
Central Library

+32 2-295-29-80
[log in to unmask] 

ec.europa.eu/libraries
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
The personal data contained in this document are dealt with in compliance with Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 ofthe European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2000 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data by the Community institutions and bodies and on the free movement of such data. For more information, see http://europa.eu/geninfo/legal_notices_en.htm#personaldata



-----Original Message-----
From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of BIBFRAME automatic digest system
Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2013 5:00 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: BIBFRAME Digest - 12 Mar 2013 to 13 Mar 2013 (#2013-49)

There are 20 messages totalling 4228 lines in this issue.

Topics of the day:

  1. Reuse (or not) of existing ontologies (20)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date:    Wed, 13 Mar 2013 09:39:05 +0000
From:    Owen Stephens <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Reuse (or not) of existing ontologies

--Apple-Mail=_CB36573B-4009-46AF-AD9D-2946CC904E17
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=iso-8859-1

Thanks for this J=0F=F6rg

While obviously plans to align bibframe elements to other RDF ontologies =
would be welcome, I'd be very interested to understand that arguments =
against simply adopting existing vocabularies where they exist?

Owen

Owen Stephens
Owen Stephens Consulting
Web: http://www.ostephens.com
Email: [log in to unmask]
Telephone: 0121 288 6936

On 12 Mar 2013, at 09:23, J=F6rg Prante <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> =46rom my understanding, there will be a process of "alignment" of =
Bibframe elements to other RDF elements. In the current phase of early =
Bibframe developement, I assume the focus is still on creating native =
Bibframe elements and vocabulary.
>=20
> There have been some work closely related to Bibframe
>=20
> - the W3C provenance incubator group charter =
http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/prov/charter
> - ONIX for Marc21 and for RDA (ONIX in RDF still ongoing work?) =
http://www.editeur.org/96/ONIX-and-MARC21
> - METS-PREMISE in RDF =
http://www.loc.gov/standards/premis/pif-presentations-2012/PREMIS-OWL-iPRE=
S2012.pdf
> - EAD to Europeana Data Model RDF =
http://pro.europeana.eu/documents/900548/559c18d6-e5f3-410a-9e3e-7ee74f87c=
302
> - ...
>=20
> The results would be very interesting to see them aligned to Bibframe =
elements.
>=20
> A wider perspective would be aligning the DataCite RDF =
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1paJgvmCMu3pbM4in6PjWAKO0gP-6ultii3DWQs=
lygq4/edit?authkey=3DCMeV3tgF&hl=3Den_GB to Bibframe. This would exceed =
the traditional MARC scope and would reveal the power of RDF by =
integrating research data environments seamlessly with Bibframe'd =
library catalog metadata.
>=20
> Also expanding the view to publisher activities is helpful to get some =
impressions for what could be done if there was Bibframe-powered data. I =
saw =
http://prezi.com/yc35ccin0ipg/discovering-and-using-rdf-at-oreilly-media/ =
for an experience of a publisher when traveling a market-driven path =
using RDF on XML-based metadata.
>=20
> J=F6rg


--Apple-Mail=_CB36573B-4009-46AF-AD9D-2946CC904E17
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset=iso-8859-1

<html><head><meta http-equiv=3D"Content-Type" content=3D"text/html =
charset=3Diso-8859-1"></head><body style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; =
-webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; =
">Thanks for this J=0F=F6rg<div><br></div><div>While obviously plans to =
align bibframe elements to other RDF ontologies would be welcome, I'd be =
very interested to understand that arguments against simply adopting =
existing vocabularies where they =
exist?</div><div><br></div><div>Owen</div><div><br><div =
apple-content-edited=3D"true">
<span class=3D"Apple-style-span" style=3D"border-collapse: separate; =
color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-style: normal; =
font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; =
line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: =
0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: =
0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; =
-webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; =
-webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: =
auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; "><div =
style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; =
-webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div>Owen Stephens</div>Owen =
Stephens Consulting</div><div style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; =
-webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">Web: =
<a =
href=3D"http://www.ostephens.com">http://www.ostephens.com</a><br>Email: =
<a href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]</a><br>Telephone:=
 0121 288 6936</div></span>
</div>
<br><div><div>On 12 Mar 2013, at 09:23, J=F6rg Prante &lt;<a =
href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]</a>&gt; =
wrote:</div><br class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote =
type=3D"cite">=46rom my understanding, there will be a process of =
"alignment" of Bibframe elements to other RDF elements. In the current =
phase of early Bibframe developement, I assume the focus is still on =
creating native Bibframe elements and vocabulary.<br><br>There have been =
some work closely related to Bibframe<br><br>- the W3C provenance =
incubator group charter <a =
href=3D"http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/prov/charter">http://www.w3.org/2=
005/Incubator/prov/charter</a><br>- ONIX for Marc21 and for RDA (ONIX in =
RDF still ongoing work?) <a =
href=3D"http://www.editeur.org/96/ONIX-and-MARC21">http://www.editeur.org/=
96/ONIX-and-MARC21</a><br>- METS-PREMISE in RDF <a =
href=3D"http://www.loc.gov/standards/premis/pif-presentations-2012/PREMIS-=
OWL-iPRES2012.pdf">http://www.loc.gov/standards/premis/pif-presentations-2=
012/PREMIS-OWL-iPRES2012.pdf</a><br>- EAD to Europeana Data Model RDF <a =
href=3D"http://pro.europeana.eu/documents/900548/559c18d6-e5f3-410a-9e3e-7=
ee74f87c302">http://pro.europeana.eu/documents/900548/559c18d6-e5f3-410a-9=
e3e-7ee74f87c302</a><br>- ...<br><br>The results would be very =
interesting to see them aligned to Bibframe elements.<br><br>A wider =
perspective would be aligning the DataCite RDF <a =
href=3D"https://docs.google.com/document/d/1paJgvmCMu3pbM4in6PjWAKO0gP-6ul=
tii3DWQslygq4/edit?authkey=3DCMeV3tgF&amp;hl=3Den_GB">https://docs.google.=
com/document/d/1paJgvmCMu3pbM4in6PjWAKO0gP-6ultii3DWQslygq4/edit?authkey=3D=
CMeV3tgF&amp;hl=3Den_GB</a> to Bibframe. This would exceed the =
traditional MARC scope and would reveal the power of RDF by integrating =
research data environments seamlessly with Bibframe'd library catalog =
metadata.<br><br>Also expanding the view to publisher activities is =
helpful to get some impressions for what could be done if there was =
Bibframe-powered data. I saw <a =
href=3D"http://prezi.com/yc35ccin0ipg/discovering-and-using-rdf-at-oreilly=
-media/">http://prezi.com/yc35ccin0ipg/discovering-and-using-rdf-at-oreill=
y-media/</a> for an experience of a publisher when traveling a =
market-driven path using RDF on XML-based =
metadata.<br><br>J=F6rg<br></blockquote></div><br></div></body></html>=

--Apple-Mail=_CB36573B-4009-46AF-AD9D-2946CC904E17--

------------------------------

Date:    Wed, 13 Mar 2013 09:51:42 +0000
From:    Robert Sanderson <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Reuse (or not) of existing ontologies

My understanding was that the current elements would be removed in
favor of the "aligned" predicates and classes.

Perhaps we could get some clarification about what this alignment
process actually entails?  The last thing the world needs is yet
another bibliographic crosswalk.

Rob

On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 9:39 AM, Owen Stephens <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Thanks for this J =F6rg
>
> While obviously plans to align bibframe elements to other RDF ontologies
> would be welcome, I'd be very interested to understand that arguments
> against simply adopting existing vocabularies where they exist?
>
> Owen
>
> Owen Stephens
> Owen Stephens Consulting
> Web: http://www.ostephens.com
> Email: [log in to unmask]
> Telephone: 0121 288 6936
>
> On 12 Mar 2013, at 09:23, J=F6rg Prante <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> From my understanding, there will be a process of "alignment" of Bibframe
> elements to other RDF elements. In the current phase of early Bibframe
> developement, I assume the focus is still on creating native Bibframe
> elements and vocabulary.
>
> There have been some work closely related to Bibframe
>
> - the W3C provenance incubator group charter
> http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/prov/charter
> - ONIX for Marc21 and for RDA (ONIX in RDF still ongoing work?)
> http://www.editeur.org/96/ONIX-and-MARC21
> - METS-PREMISE in RDF
> http://www.loc.gov/standards/premis/pif-presentations-2012/PREMIS-OWL-iPR=
ES2012.pdf
> - EAD to Europeana Data Model RDF
> http://pro.europeana.eu/documents/900548/559c18d6-e5f3-410a-9e3e-7ee74f87=
c302
> - ...
>
> The results would be very interesting to see them aligned to Bibframe
> elements.
>
> A wider perspective would be aligning the DataCite RDF
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1paJgvmCMu3pbM4in6PjWAKO0gP-6ultii3DWQ=
slygq4/edit?authkey=3DCMeV3tgF&hl=3Den_GB
> to Bibframe. This would exceed the traditional MARC scope and would revea=
l
> the power of RDF by integrating research data environments seamlessly wit=
h
> Bibframe'd library catalog metadata.
>
> Also expanding the view to publisher activities is helpful to get some
> impressions for what could be done if there was Bibframe-powered data. I =
saw
> http://prezi.com/yc35ccin0ipg/discovering-and-using-rdf-at-oreilly-media/
> for an experience of a publisher when traveling a market-driven path usin=
g
> RDF on XML-based metadata.
>
> J=F6rg
>
>

------------------------------

Date:    Wed, 13 Mar 2013 08:47:22 -0400
From:    Ross Singer <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Reuse (or not) of existing ontologies

--Apple-Mail=_AEA65721-9CD2-4524-979F-B24B53A9E4C6
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=iso-8859-1

Owen, I can't speak for Bibframe directly, but in the case, say, of RDA, =
the argument against using existing vocabularies vs. rolling your own =
and aligning them is that you can't control the fate of vocabularies you =
don't own.  So if something happens to them (properties get =
deprecated/replaced, domain registrations lapse, etc.), you still have =
control of the predicates/classes you are using and can realign them as =
necessary.

Not saying that I necessarily subscribe to that philosophy (although I =
see its merits), but I think that is probably the argument.

-Ross.

On Mar 13, 2013, at 5:39 AM, Owen Stephens <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Thanks for this J=0F=F6rg
>=20
> While obviously plans to align bibframe elements to other RDF =
ontologies would be welcome, I'd be very interested to understand that =
arguments against simply adopting existing vocabularies where they =
exist?
>=20
> Owen
>=20
> Owen Stephens
> Owen Stephens Consulting
> Web: http://www.ostephens.com
> Email: [log in to unmask]
> Telephone: 0121 288 6936
>=20
> On 12 Mar 2013, at 09:23, J=F6rg Prante <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>=20
>> =46rom my understanding, there will be a process of "alignment" of =
Bibframe elements to other RDF elements. In the current phase of early =
Bibframe developement, I assume the focus is still on creating native =
Bibframe elements and vocabulary.
>>=20
>> There have been some work closely related to Bibframe
>>=20
>> - the W3C provenance incubator group charter =
http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/prov/charter
>> - ONIX for Marc21 and for RDA (ONIX in RDF still ongoing work?) =
http://www.editeur.org/96/ONIX-and-MARC21
>> - METS-PREMISE in RDF =
http://www.loc.gov/standards/premis/pif-presentations-2012/PREMIS-OWL-iPRE=
S2012.pdf
>> - EAD to Europeana Data Model RDF =
http://pro.europeana.eu/documents/900548/559c18d6-e5f3-410a-9e3e-7ee74f87c=
302
>> - ...
>>=20
>> The results would be very interesting to see them aligned to Bibframe =
elements.
>>=20
>> A wider perspective would be aligning the DataCite RDF =
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1paJgvmCMu3pbM4in6PjWAKO0gP-6ultii3DWQs=
lygq4/edit?authkey=3DCMeV3tgF&hl=3Den_GB to Bibframe. This would exceed =
the traditional MARC scope and would reveal the power of RDF by =
integrating research data environments seamlessly with Bibframe'd =
library catalog metadata.
>>=20
>> Also expanding the view to publisher activities is helpful to get =
some impressions for what could be done if there was Bibframe-powered =
data. I saw =
http://prezi.com/yc35ccin0ipg/discovering-and-using-rdf-at-oreilly-media/ =
for an experience of a publisher when traveling a market-driven path =
using RDF on XML-based metadata.
>>=20
>> J=F6rg
>=20


--Apple-Mail=_AEA65721-9CD2-4524-979F-B24B53A9E4C6
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset=iso-8859-1

<html><head><meta http-equiv=3D"Content-Type" content=3D"text/html =
charset=3Diso-8859-1"></head><body style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; =
-webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">Owen, =
I can't speak for Bibframe directly, but in the case, say, of RDA, the =
argument against using existing vocabularies vs. rolling your own and =
aligning them is that you can't control the fate of vocabularies you =
don't own. &nbsp;So if something happens to them (properties get =
deprecated/replaced, domain registrations lapse, etc.), you still have =
control of the predicates/classes you are using and can realign them as =
necessary.<div><br></div><div>Not saying that I necessarily subscribe to =
that philosophy (although I see its merits), but I think that is =
probably the =
argument.</div><div><br></div><div>-Ross.<br><div><br></div><div><div><div=
>On Mar 13, 2013, at 5:39 AM, Owen Stephens &lt;<a =
href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]</a>&gt; =
wrote:</div><br class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote =
type=3D"cite"><meta http-equiv=3D"Content-Type" content=3D"text/html =
charset=3Diso-8859-1"><div style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; =
-webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; =
">Thanks for this J=0F=F6rg<div><br></div><div>While obviously plans to =
align bibframe elements to other RDF ontologies would be welcome, I'd be =
very interested to understand that arguments against simply adopting =
existing vocabularies where they =
exist?</div><div><br></div><div>Owen</div><div><br><div =
apple-content-edited=3D"true">
<span class=3D"Apple-style-span" style=3D"border-collapse: separate; =
font-family: Helvetica; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; =
font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; =
orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: =
none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; border-spacing: =
0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: =
auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; "><div =
style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; =
-webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div>Owen Stephens</div>Owen =
Stephens Consulting</div><div style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; =
-webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">Web: =
<a =
href=3D"http://www.ostephens.com/">http://www.ostephens.com</a><br>Email: =
<a href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]</a><br>Telephone:=
 0121 288 6936</div></span>
</div>
<br><div><div>On 12 Mar 2013, at 09:23, J=F6rg Prante &lt;<a =
href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]</a>&gt; =
wrote:</div><br class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote =
type=3D"cite">=46rom my understanding, there will be a process of =
"alignment" of Bibframe elements to other RDF elements. In the current =
phase of early Bibframe developement, I assume the focus is still on =
creating native Bibframe elements and vocabulary.<br><br>There have been =
some work closely related to Bibframe<br><br>- the W3C provenance =
incubator group charter <a =
href=3D"http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/prov/charter">http://www.w3.org/2=
005/Incubator/prov/charter</a><br>- ONIX for Marc21 and for RDA (ONIX in =
RDF still ongoing work?) <a =
href=3D"http://www.editeur.org/96/ONIX-and-MARC21">http://www.editeur.org/=
96/ONIX-and-MARC21</a><br>- METS-PREMISE in RDF <a =
href=3D"http://www.loc.gov/standards/premis/pif-presentations-2012/PREMIS-=
OWL-iPRES2012.pdf">http://www.loc.gov/standards/premis/pif-presentations-2=
012/PREMIS-OWL-iPRES2012.pdf</a><br>- EAD to Europeana Data Model RDF <a =
href=3D"http://pro.europeana.eu/documents/900548/559c18d6-e5f3-410a-9e3e-7=
ee74f87c302">http://pro.europeana.eu/documents/900548/559c18d6-e5f3-410a-9=
e3e-7ee74f87c302</a><br>- ...<br><br>The results would be very =
interesting to see them aligned to Bibframe elements.<br><br>A wider =
perspective would be aligning the DataCite RDF <a =
href=3D"https://docs.google.com/document/d/1paJgvmCMu3pbM4in6PjWAKO0gP-6ul=
tii3DWQslygq4/edit?authkey=3DCMeV3tgF&amp;hl=3Den_GB">https://docs.google.=
com/document/d/1paJgvmCMu3pbM4in6PjWAKO0gP-6ultii3DWQslygq4/edit?authkey=3D=
CMeV3tgF&amp;hl=3Den_GB</a> to Bibframe. This would exceed the =
traditional MARC scope and would reveal the power of RDF by integrating =
research data environments seamlessly with Bibframe'd library catalog =
metadata.<br><br>Also expanding the view to publisher activities is =
helpful to get some impressions for what could be done if there was =
Bibframe-powered data. I saw <a =
href=3D"http://prezi.com/yc35ccin0ipg/discovering-and-using-rdf-at-oreilly=
-media/">http://prezi.com/yc35ccin0ipg/discovering-and-using-rdf-at-oreill=
y-media/</a> for an experience of a publisher when traveling a =
market-driven path using RDF on XML-based =
metadata.<br><br>J=F6rg<br></blockquote></div><br></div></div></blockquote=
></div><br></div></div></body></html>=

--Apple-Mail=_AEA65721-9CD2-4524-979F-B24B53A9E4C6--

------------------------------

Date:    Wed, 13 Mar 2013 13:36:36 +0000
From:    Shlomo Sanders <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Reuse (or not) of existing ontologies

--_000_493E83663F0E426DA311BC5990AF394Bexlibrisgroupcom_
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

How can linking to RDF actually work in real life if each group has their o=
n vocabulary?

Good RDF In and display in browser, sure that will work.
But programmatic use of the data when there is no standard (or even close t=
o a standard) vocabulary?

Thanks,
Shlomo

Sent from my iPad

On Mar 13, 2013, at 15:00, "Ross Singer" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:ross=
[log in to unmask]>> wrote:

Owen, I can't speak for Bibframe directly, but in the case, say, of RDA, th=
e argument against using existing vocabularies vs. rolling your own and ali=
gning them is that you can't control the fate of vocabularies you don't own=
.  So if something happens to them (properties get deprecated/replaced, dom=
ain registrations lapse, etc.), you still have control of the predicates/cl=
asses you are using and can realign them as necessary.

Not saying that I necessarily subscribe to that philosophy (although I see =
its merits), but I think that is probably the argument.

-Ross.

On Mar 13, 2013, at 5:39 AM, Owen Stephens <[log in to unmask]<mailto:owen@=
OSTEPHENS.COM>> wrote:

Thanks for this J=0F=F6rg

While obviously plans to align bibframe elements to other RDF ontologies wo=
uld be welcome, I'd be very interested to understand that arguments against=
 simply adopting existing vocabularies where they exist?

Owen

Owen Stephens
Owen Stephens Consulting
Web: http://www.ostephens.com<http://www.ostephens.com/>
Email: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Telephone: 0121 288 6936

On 12 Mar 2013, at 09:23, J=F6rg Prante <[log in to unmask]<mailto:joerg=
[log in to unmask]>> wrote:

From my understanding, there will be a process of "alignment" of Bibframe e=
lements to other RDF elements. In the current phase of early Bibframe devel=
opement, I assume the focus is still on creating native Bibframe elements a=
nd vocabulary.

There have been some work closely related to Bibframe

- the W3C provenance incubator group charter http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubat=
or/prov/charter
- ONIX for Marc21 and for RDA (ONIX in RDF still ongoing work?) http://www.=
editeur.org/96/ONIX-and-MARC21
- METS-PREMISE in RDF http://www.loc.gov/standards/premis/pif-presentations=
-2012/PREMIS-OWL-iPRES2012.pdf
- EAD to Europeana Data Model RDF http://pro.europeana.eu/documents/900548/=
559c18d6-e5f3-410a-9e3e-7ee74f87c302
- ...

The results would be very interesting to see them aligned to Bibframe eleme=
nts.

A wider perspective would be aligning the DataCite RDF https://docs.google.=
com/document/d/1paJgvmCMu3pbM4in6PjWAKO0gP-6ultii3DWQslygq4/edit?authkey=3D=
CMeV3tgF&hl=3Den_GB to Bibframe. This would exceed the traditional MARC sco=
pe and would reveal the power of RDF by integrating research data environme=
nts seamlessly with Bibframe'd library catalog metadata.

Also expanding the view to publisher activities is helpful to get some impr=
essions for what could be done if there was Bibframe-powered data. I saw ht=
tp://prezi.com/yc35ccin0ipg/discovering-and-using-rdf-at-oreilly-media/ for=
 an experience of a publisher when traveling a market-driven path using RDF=
 on XML-based metadata.

J=F6rg



--_000_493E83663F0E426DA311BC5990AF394Bexlibrisgroupcom_
Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv=3D"Content-Type" content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-=
1">
</head>
<body dir=3D"auto">
<div>How can linking to RDF actually work in real life if each group has th=
eir on vocabulary?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Good RDF In and display in browser, sure that will work.</div>
<div>But programmatic use of the data when there is no standard (or even cl=
ose to a standard) vocabulary?<br>
<br>
<div>Thanks,</div>
Shlomo
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Sent from my iPad</div>
</div>
<div><br>
On Mar 13, 2013, at 15:00, &quot;Ross Singer&quot; &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:ro=
[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]</a>&gt; wrote:<br>
<br>
</div>
<blockquote type=3D"cite">
<div>Owen, I can't speak for Bibframe directly, but in the case, say, of RD=
A, the argument against using existing vocabularies vs. rolling your own an=
d aligning them is that you can't control the fate of vocabularies you don'=
t own. &nbsp;So if something happens
 to them (properties get deprecated/replaced, domain registrations lapse, e=
tc.), you still have control of the predicates/classes you are using and ca=
n realign them as necessary.
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Not saying that I necessarily subscribe to that philosophy (although I=
 see its merits), but I think that is probably the argument.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>-Ross.<br>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>On Mar 13, 2013, at 5:39 AM, Owen Stephens &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:owen@=
OSTEPHENS.COM">[log in to unmask]</a>&gt; wrote:</div>
<br class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline">
<blockquote type=3D"cite">
<div style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line=
-break: after-white-space; ">
Thanks for this J&#15;=F6rg
<div><br>
</div>
<div>While obviously plans to align bibframe elements to other RDF ontologi=
es would be welcome, I'd be very interested to understand that arguments ag=
ainst simply adopting existing vocabularies where they exist?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Owen</div>
<div><br>
<div apple-content-edited=3D"true"><span class=3D"Apple-style-span" style=
=3D"border-collapse: separate; font-family: Helvetica; font-style: normal; =
font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-hei=
ght: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-t=
ransform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; border-s=
pacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-ad=
just: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; ">
<div style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line=
-break: after-white-space; ">
<div>Owen Stephens</div>
Owen Stephens Consulting</div>
<div style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line=
-break: after-white-space; ">
Web: <a href=3D"http://www.ostephens.com/">http://www.ostephens.com</a><br>
Email: <a href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]</a><br>
Telephone: 0121 288 6936</div>
</span></div>
<br>
<div>
<div>On 12 Mar 2013, at 09:23, J=F6rg Prante &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:joergpra=
[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]</a>&gt; wrote:</div>
<br class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline">
<blockquote type=3D"cite">From my understanding, there will be a process of=
 &quot;alignment&quot; of Bibframe elements to other RDF elements. In the c=
urrent phase of early Bibframe developement, I assume the focus is still on=
 creating native Bibframe elements and vocabulary.<br>
<br>
There have been some work closely related to Bibframe<br>
<br>
- the W3C provenance incubator group charter <a href=3D"http://www.w3.org/2=
005/Incubator/prov/charter">
http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/prov/charter</a><br>
- ONIX for Marc21 and for RDA (ONIX in RDF still ongoing work?) <a href=3D"=
http://www.editeur.org/96/ONIX-and-MARC21">
http://www.editeur.org/96/ONIX-and-MARC21</a><br>
- METS-PREMISE in RDF <a href=3D"http://www.loc.gov/standards/premis/pif-pr=
esentations-2012/PREMIS-OWL-iPRES2012.pdf">
http://www.loc.gov/standards/premis/pif-presentations-2012/PREMIS-OWL-iPRES=
2012.pdf</a><br>
- EAD to Europeana Data Model RDF <a href=3D"http://pro.europeana.eu/docume=
nts/900548/559c18d6-e5f3-410a-9e3e-7ee74f87c302">
http://pro.europeana.eu/documents/900548/559c18d6-e5f3-410a-9e3e-7ee74f87c3=
02</a><br>
- ...<br>
<br>
The results would be very interesting to see them aligned to Bibframe eleme=
nts.<br>
<br>
A wider perspective would be aligning the DataCite RDF <a href=3D"https://d=
ocs.google.com/document/d/1paJgvmCMu3pbM4in6PjWAKO0gP-6ultii3DWQslygq4/edit=
?authkey=3DCMeV3tgF&amp;hl=3Den_GB">
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1paJgvmCMu3pbM4in6PjWAKO0gP-6ultii3DWQsl=
ygq4/edit?authkey=3DCMeV3tgF&amp;hl=3Den_GB</a> to Bibframe. This would exc=
eed the traditional MARC scope and would reveal the power of RDF by integra=
ting research data environments seamlessly
 with Bibframe'd library catalog metadata.<br>
<br>
Also expanding the view to publisher activities is helpful to get some impr=
essions for what could be done if there was Bibframe-powered data. I saw
<a href=3D"http://prezi.com/yc35ccin0ipg/discovering-and-using-rdf-at-oreil=
ly-media/">
http://prezi.com/yc35ccin0ipg/discovering-and-using-rdf-at-oreilly-media/</=
a> for an experience of a publisher when traveling a market-driven path usi=
ng RDF on XML-based metadata.<br>
<br>
J=F6rg<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>

--_000_493E83663F0E426DA311BC5990AF394Bexlibrisgroupcom_--

------------------------------

Date:    Wed, 13 Mar 2013 09:55:30 -0400
From:    Ross Singer <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Reuse (or not) of existing ontologies

--Apple-Mail=_00C5E2DF-F7F1-469E-9B89-BF59FBF9D3CE
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=iso-8859-1

On Mar 13, 2013, at 9:36 AM, Shlomo Sanders =
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> How can linking to RDF actually work in real life if each group has =
their on vocabulary?

Well, you align the vocabularies through RDFS, OWL, or something =
similar.
>=20
> Good RDF In and display in browser, sure that will work.
> But programmatic use of the data when there is no standard (or even =
close to a standard) vocabulary?

Well, this is exactly why one would propose RDF, simply because you =
*can* explicitly align the vocabularies.  The downside is that it would =
require a fair amount of inference/reasoning to work, which is currently =
fairly unrealistic (not impossible, just unrealistic for widespread =
adoption) which I don't expect to change any time in the near future.

-Ross.
>=20
> Thanks,
> Shlomo
>=20
> Sent from my iPad
>=20
> On Mar 13, 2013, at 15:00, "Ross Singer" <[log in to unmask]> =
wrote:
>=20
>> Owen, I can't speak for Bibframe directly, but in the case, say, of =
RDA, the argument against using existing vocabularies vs. rolling your =
own and aligning them is that you can't control the fate of vocabularies =
you don't own.  So if something happens to them (properties get =
deprecated/replaced, domain registrations lapse, etc.), you still have =
control of the predicates/classes you are using and can realign them as =
necessary.
>>=20
>> Not saying that I necessarily subscribe to that philosophy (although =
I see its merits), but I think that is probably the argument.
>>=20
>> -Ross.
>>=20
>> On Mar 13, 2013, at 5:39 AM, Owen Stephens <[log in to unmask]> =
wrote:
>>=20
>>> Thanks for this J=0F=F6rg
>>>=20
>>> While obviously plans to align bibframe elements to other RDF =
ontologies would be welcome, I'd be very interested to understand that =
arguments against simply adopting existing vocabularies where they =
exist?
>>>=20
>>> Owen
>>>=20
>>> Owen Stephens
>>> Owen Stephens Consulting
>>> Web: http://www.ostephens.com
>>> Email: [log in to unmask]
>>> Telephone: 0121 288 6936
>>>=20
>>> On 12 Mar 2013, at 09:23, J=F6rg Prante <[log in to unmask]> =
wrote:
>>>=20
>>>> =46rom my understanding, there will be a process of "alignment" of =
Bibframe elements to other RDF elements. In the current phase of early =
Bibframe developement, I assume the focus is still on creating native =
Bibframe elements and vocabulary.
>>>>=20
>>>> There have been some work closely related to Bibframe
>>>>=20
>>>> - the W3C provenance incubator group charter =
http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/prov/charter
>>>> - ONIX for Marc21 and for RDA (ONIX in RDF still ongoing work?) =
http://www.editeur.org/96/ONIX-and-MARC21
>>>> - METS-PREMISE in RDF =
http://www.loc.gov/standards/premis/pif-presentations-2012/PREMIS-OWL-iPRE=
S2012.pdf
>>>> - EAD to Europeana Data Model RDF =
http://pro.europeana.eu/documents/900548/559c18d6-e5f3-410a-9e3e-7ee74f87c=
302
>>>> - ...
>>>>=20
>>>> The results would be very interesting to see them aligned to =
Bibframe elements.
>>>>=20
>>>> A wider perspective would be aligning the DataCite RDF =
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1paJgvmCMu3pbM4in6PjWAKO0gP-6ultii3DWQs=
lygq4/edit?authkey=3DCMeV3tgF&hl=3Den_GB to Bibframe. This would exceed =
the traditional MARC scope and would reveal the power of RDF by =
integrating research data environments seamlessly with Bibframe'd =
library catalog metadata.
>>>>=20
>>>> Also expanding the view to publisher activities is helpful to get =
some impressions for what could be done if there was Bibframe-powered =
data. I saw =
http://prezi.com/yc35ccin0ipg/discovering-and-using-rdf-at-oreilly-media/ =
for an experience of a publisher when traveling a market-driven path =
using RDF on XML-based metadata.
>>>>=20
>>>> J=F6rg
>>>=20
>>=20


--Apple-Mail=_00C5E2DF-F7F1-469E-9B89-BF59FBF9D3CE
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset=iso-8859-1

<html><head><meta http-equiv=3D"Content-Type" content=3D"text/html =
charset=3Diso-8859-1"></head><body style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; =
-webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; =
"><div><div>On Mar 13, 2013, at 9:36 AM, Shlomo Sanders &lt;<a =
href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">Shlomo.Sanders@EXLIBRISGR=
OUP.COM</a>&gt; wrote:</div><br =
class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type=3D"cite">

<meta http-equiv=3D"Content-Type" content=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Diso-8859-1">

<div dir=3D"auto">
<div>How can linking to RDF actually work in real life if each group has =
their on vocabulary?</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div>Well, you =
align the vocabularies through RDFS, OWL, or something =
similar.<br><blockquote type=3D"cite"><div dir=3D"auto">
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Good RDF In and display in browser, sure that will work.</div>
<div>But programmatic use of the data when there is no standard (or even =
close to a standard) =
vocabulary?<br></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div>Well, this is =
exactly why one would propose RDF, simply because you *can* explicitly =
align the vocabularies. &nbsp;The downside is that it would require a =
fair amount of inference/reasoning to work, which is currently fairly =
unrealistic (not impossible, just unrealistic for widespread adoption) =
which I don't expect to change any time in the near =
future.</div><div><br></div><div>-Ross.</div><div><blockquote =
type=3D"cite"><div dir=3D"auto"><div>
<br>
<div>Thanks,</div>
Shlomo
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Sent from my iPad</div>
</div>
<div><br>
On Mar 13, 2013, at 15:00, "Ross Singer" &lt;<a =
href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]</a>&gt; =
wrote:<br>
<br>
</div>
<blockquote type=3D"cite">
<div>Owen, I can't speak for Bibframe directly, but in the case, say, of =
RDA, the argument against using existing vocabularies vs. rolling your =
own and aligning them is that you can't control the fate of vocabularies =
you don't own. &nbsp;So if something happens
 to them (properties get deprecated/replaced, domain registrations =
lapse, etc.), you still have control of the predicates/classes you are =
using and can realign them as necessary.
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Not saying that I necessarily subscribe to that philosophy =
(although I see its merits), but I think that is probably the =
argument.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>-Ross.<br>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>On Mar 13, 2013, at 5:39 AM, Owen Stephens &lt;<a =
href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]</a>&gt; =
wrote:</div>
<br class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline">
<blockquote type=3D"cite">
<div style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; =
-webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">
Thanks for this J=0F=F6rg
<div><br>
</div>
<div>While obviously plans to align bibframe elements to other RDF =
ontologies would be welcome, I'd be very interested to understand that =
arguments against simply adopting existing vocabularies where they =
exist?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Owen</div>
<div><br>
<div apple-content-edited=3D"true"><span class=3D"Apple-style-span" =
style=3D"border-collapse: separate; font-family: Helvetica; font-style: =
normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: =
normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; =
text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; =
word-spacing: 0px; border-spacing: 0px; =
-webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: =
auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; ">
<div style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; =
-webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">
<div>Owen Stephens</div>
Owen Stephens Consulting</div>
<div style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; =
-webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">
Web: <a =
href=3D"http://www.ostephens.com/">http://www.ostephens.com</a><br>
Email: <a href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]</a><br>
Telephone: 0121 288 6936</div>
</span></div>
<br>
<div>
<div>On 12 Mar 2013, at 09:23, J=F6rg Prante &lt;<a =
href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]</a>&gt; =
wrote:</div>
<br class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline">
<blockquote type=3D"cite">=46rom my understanding, there will be a =
process of "alignment" of Bibframe elements to other RDF elements. In =
the current phase of early Bibframe developement, I assume the focus is =
still on creating native Bibframe elements and vocabulary.<br>
<br>
There have been some work closely related to Bibframe<br>
<br>
- the W3C provenance incubator group charter <a =
href=3D"http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/prov/charter">
http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/prov/charter</a><br>
- ONIX for Marc21 and for RDA (ONIX in RDF still ongoing work?) <a =
href=3D"http://www.editeur.org/96/ONIX-and-MARC21">
http://www.editeur.org/96/ONIX-and-MARC21</a><br>
- METS-PREMISE in RDF <a =
href=3D"http://www.loc.gov/standards/premis/pif-presentations-2012/PREMIS-=
OWL-iPRES2012.pdf">
=
http://www.loc.gov/standards/premis/pif-presentations-2012/PREMIS-OWL-iPRE=
S2012.pdf</a><br>
- EAD to Europeana Data Model RDF <a =
href=3D"http://pro.europeana.eu/documents/900548/559c18d6-e5f3-410a-9e3e-7=
ee74f87c302">
=
http://pro.europeana.eu/documents/900548/559c18d6-e5f3-410a-9e3e-7ee74f87c=
302</a><br>
- ...<br>
<br>
The results would be very interesting to see them aligned to Bibframe =
elements.<br>
<br>
A wider perspective would be aligning the DataCite RDF <a =
href=3D"https://docs.google.com/document/d/1paJgvmCMu3pbM4in6PjWAKO0gP-6ul=
tii3DWQslygq4/edit?authkey=3DCMeV3tgF&amp;hl=3Den_GB">
=
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1paJgvmCMu3pbM4in6PjWAKO0gP-6ultii3DWQs=
lygq4/edit?authkey=3DCMeV3tgF&amp;hl=3Den_GB</a> to Bibframe. This would =
exceed the traditional MARC scope and would reveal the power of RDF by =
integrating research data environments seamlessly
 with Bibframe'd library catalog metadata.<br>
<br>
Also expanding the view to publisher activities is helpful to get some =
impressions for what could be done if there was Bibframe-powered data. I =
saw
<a =
href=3D"http://prezi.com/yc35ccin0ipg/discovering-and-using-rdf-at-oreilly=
-media/">
=
http://prezi.com/yc35ccin0ipg/discovering-and-using-rdf-at-oreilly-media/<=
/a> for an experience of a publisher when traveling a market-driven path =
using RDF on XML-based metadata.<br>
<br>
J=F6rg<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>

</blockquote></div><br></body></html>=

--Apple-Mail=_00C5E2DF-F7F1-469E-9B89-BF59FBF9D3CE--

------------------------------

Date:    Wed, 13 Mar 2013 14:32:39 +0000
From:    Shlomo Sanders <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Reuse (or not) of existing ontologies

--_000_768F135D8DFF3A4A9E4BFF0549723FD953BFD137ILEXM02CorpExli_
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

"The downside is that it would require a fair amount of inference/reasoning=
 to work, which is currently fairly unrealistic (not impossible, just unrea=
listic for widespread adoption) which I don't expect to change any time in =
the near future."

In short, it can work but will be expensive for vendors to develop, complic=
ated and expensive for Libraries to use...

Instead we should works towards a common vocabulary for the most important =
core information.
At least for some of the core stuff... bibo, dc, foaf, etc.


Thanks,
Shlomo

Experience the all-new, singing and dancing interactive Primo brochure<http=
://www.exlibrispublications.com/primo/>

From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum [mailto:BIBFRAME@=
LISTSERV.LOC.GOV] On Behalf Of Ross Singer
Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2013 15:56
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [BIBFRAME] Reuse (or not) of existing ontologies

On Mar 13, 2013, at 9:36 AM, Shlomo Sanders <[log in to unmask]
OM<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:


How can linking to RDF actually work in real life if each group has their o=
n vocabulary?

Well, you align the vocabularies through RDFS, OWL, or something similar.


Good RDF In and display in browser, sure that will work.
But programmatic use of the data when there is no standard (or even close t=
o a standard) vocabulary?

Well, this is exactly why one would propose RDF, simply because you *can* e=
xplicitly align the vocabularies.  The downside is that it would require a =
fair amount of inference/reasoning to work, which is currently fairly unrea=
listic (not impossible, just unrealistic for widespread adoption) which I d=
on't expect to change any time in the near future.

-Ross.

Thanks,
Shlomo

Sent from my iPad

On Mar 13, 2013, at 15:00, "Ross Singer" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:ross=
[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
Owen, I can't speak for Bibframe directly, but in the case, say, of RDA, th=
e argument against using existing vocabularies vs. rolling your own and ali=
gning them is that you can't control the fate of vocabularies you don't own=
.  So if something happens to them (properties get deprecated/replaced, dom=
ain registrations lapse, etc.), you still have control of the predicates/cl=
asses you are using and can realign them as necessary.

Not saying that I necessarily subscribe to that philosophy (although I see =
its merits), but I think that is probably the argument.

-Ross.

On Mar 13, 2013, at 5:39 AM, Owen Stephens <[log in to unmask]<mailto:owen@=
OSTEPHENS.COM>> wrote:


Thanks for this J=F6rg

While obviously plans to align bibframe elements to other RDF ontologies wo=
uld be welcome, I'd be very interested to understand that arguments against=
 simply adopting existing vocabularies where they exist?

Owen

Owen Stephens
Owen Stephens Consulting
Web: http://www.ostephens.com<http://www.ostephens.com/>
Email: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Telephone: 0121 288 6936

On 12 Mar 2013, at 09:23, J=F6rg Prante <[log in to unmask]<mailto:joerg=
[log in to unmask]>> wrote:


From my understanding, there will be a process of "alignment" of Bibframe e=
lements to other RDF elements. In the current phase of early Bibframe devel=
opement, I assume the focus is still on creating native Bibframe elements a=
nd vocabulary.

There have been some work closely related to Bibframe

- the W3C provenance incubator group charter http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubat=
or/prov/charter
- ONIX for Marc21 and for RDA (ONIX in RDF still ongoing work?) http://www.=
editeur.org/96/ONIX-and-MARC21
- METS-PREMISE in RDF http://www.loc.gov/standards/premis/pif-presentations=
-2012/PREMIS-OWL-iPRES2012.pdf
- EAD to Europeana Data Model RDF http://pro.europeana.eu/documents/900548/=
559c18d6-e5f3-410a-9e3e-7ee74f87c302
- ...

The results would be very interesting to see them aligned to Bibframe eleme=
nts.

A wider perspective would be aligning the DataCite RDF https://docs.google.=
com/document/d/1paJgvmCMu3pbM4in6PjWAKO0gP-6ultii3DWQslygq4/edit?authkey=3D=
CMeV3tgF&hl=3Den_GB to Bibframe. This would exceed the traditional MARC sco=
pe and would reveal the power of RDF by integrating research data environme=
nts seamlessly with Bibframe'd library catalog metadata.

Also expanding the view to publisher activities is helpful to get some impr=
essions for what could be done if there was Bibframe-powered data. I saw ht=
tp://prezi.com/yc35ccin0ipg/discovering-and-using-rdf-at-oreilly-media/ for=
 an experience of a publisher when traveling a market-driven path using RDF=
 on XML-based metadata.

J=F6rg




--_000_768F135D8DFF3A4A9E4BFF0549723FD953BFD137ILEXM02CorpExli_
Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<html xmlns:v=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o=3D"urn:schemas-micr=
osoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" =
xmlns:x=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:excel" xmlns:m=3D"http://schema=
s.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns=3D"http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html=
40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv=3D"Content-Type" content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-=
1">
<meta name=3D"Generator" content=3D"Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
	{font-family:Helvetica;
	panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;}
@font-face
	{font-family:Helvetica;
	panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;}
@font-face
	{font-family:Calibri;
	panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
	{font-family:Tahoma;
	panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
	{margin:0in;
	margin-bottom:.0001pt;
	font-size:12.0pt;
	font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
	{mso-style-priority:99;
	color:blue;
	text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
	{mso-style-priority:99;
	color:purple;
	text-decoration:underline;}
code
	{mso-style-priority:99;
	font-family:"Courier New";}
span.apple-style-span
	{mso-style-name:apple-style-span;}
span.EmailStyle18
	{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
	font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
	color:#1F497D;}
span.apple-converted-space
	{mso-style-name:apple-converted-space;}
.MsoChpDefault
	{mso-style-type:export-only;
	font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
	{size:8.5in 11.0in;
	margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;}
div.WordSection1
	{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext=3D"edit" spidmax=3D"1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext=3D"edit">
<o:idmap v:ext=3D"edit" data=3D"1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang=3D"EN-US" link=3D"blue" vlink=3D"purple">
<div class=3D"WordSection1">
<p class=3D"MsoNormal">&#8220;The downside is that it would require a fair =
amount of inference/reasoning to work, which is currently fairly unrealisti=
c (not impossible, just unrealistic for widespread adoption) which I don't =
expect to change any time in the near future.&#8221;<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal">In short, it can work but will be expensive for vend=
ors to develop, complicated and expensive for Libraries to use&#8230;<o:p><=
/o:p></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal">Instead we should works towards a common vocabulary =
for the <u>
most important core information</u>.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal">At least for some of the core stuff&#8230; bibo, dc,=
 foaf, etc.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Ca=
libri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1F497D">Thanks,<o:p></o:p></span>=
</p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Ca=
libri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1F497D">Shlomo<o:p></o:p></span><=
/p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Ca=
libri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1F497D"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span><=
/p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Ca=
libri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1F497D">Experience the all-new, s=
inging and dancing interactive
<a href=3D"http://www.exlibrispublications.com/primo/">Primo brochure</a> <=
o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Ca=
libri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1F497D"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span><=
/p>
<div>
<div style=3D"border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in =
0in 0in">
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><b><span style=3D"font-size:10.0pt;font-family:&quot=
;Tahoma&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;">From:</span></b><span style=3D"font-s=
ize:10.0pt;font-family:&quot;Tahoma&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;"> Bibliogr=
aphic Framework Transition Initiative Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]
OV]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Ross Singer<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, March 13, 2013 15:56<br>
<b>To:</b> [log in to unmask]<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [BIBFRAME] Reuse (or not) of existing ontologies<o:p></=
o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal">On Mar 13, 2013, at 9:36 AM, Shlomo Sanders &lt;<a h=
ref=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">Shlomo.Sanders@EXLIBRISGROU=
P.COM</a>&gt; wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal">How can linking to RDF actually work in real life if=
 each group has their on vocabulary?<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
</div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal">Well, you align the vocabularies through RDFS, OWL, =
or something similar.<br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal">Good RDF In and display in browser, sure that will w=
ork.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal">But programmatic use of the data when there is no st=
andard (or even close to a standard) vocabulary?<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
</div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal">Well, this is exactly why one would propose RDF, sim=
ply because you *can* explicitly align the vocabularies. &nbsp;The downside=
 is that it would require a fair amount of inference/reasoning to work, whi=
ch is currently fairly unrealistic (not
 impossible, just unrealistic for widespread adoption) which I don't expect=
 to change any time in the near future.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal">-Ross.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<blockquote style=3D"margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal">Thanks,<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal">Shlomo <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal">Sent from my iPad<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-bottom:12.0pt"><br>
On Mar 13, 2013, at 15:00, &quot;Ross Singer&quot; &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:ro=
[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]</a>&gt; wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style=3D"margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal">Owen, I can't speak for Bibframe directly, but in th=
e case, say, of RDA, the argument against using existing vocabularies vs. r=
olling your own and aligning them is that you can't control the fate of voc=
abularies you don't own. &nbsp;So if something
 happens to them (properties get deprecated/replaced, domain registrations =
lapse, etc.), you still have control of the predicates/classes you are usin=
g and can realign them as necessary.
<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal">Not saying that I necessarily subscribe to that phil=
osophy (although I see its merits), but I think that is probably the argume=
nt.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal">-Ross.<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal">On Mar 13, 2013, at 5:39 AM, Owen Stephens &lt;<a hr=
ef=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]</a>&gt; wrote:<o:p></o:=
p></p>
</div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal">Thanks for this J=F6rg <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal">While obviously plans to align bibframe elements to =
other RDF ontologies would be welcome, I'd be very interested to understand=
 that arguments against simply adopting existing vocabularies where they ex=
ist?<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal">Owen<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"font-size:13.5pt;font-family:&quot;He=
lvetica&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;">Owen Stephens<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"font-size:13.5pt;font-family:&quot;He=
lvetica&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;">Owen Stephens Consulting<o:p></o:p></=
span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"font-size:13.5pt;font-family:&quot;He=
lvetica&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;">Web:
<a href=3D"http://www.ostephens.com/">http://www.ostephens.com</a><br>
Email: <a href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]</a><br>
Telephone: 0121 288 6936<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal">On 12 Mar 2013, at 09:23, J=F6rg Prante &lt;<a href=
=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]</a>&gt; wrote:<o:p>=
</o:p></p>
</div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><br>
<br>
<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal">From my understanding, there will be a process of &q=
uot;alignment&quot; of Bibframe elements to other RDF elements. In the curr=
ent phase of early Bibframe developement, I assume the focus is still on cr=
eating native Bibframe elements and vocabulary.<br>
<br>
There have been some work closely related to Bibframe<br>
<br>
- the W3C provenance incubator group charter <a href=3D"http://www.w3.org/2=
005/Incubator/prov/charter">
http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/prov/charter</a><br>
- ONIX for Marc21 and for RDA (ONIX in RDF still ongoing work?) <a href=3D"=
http://www.editeur.org/96/ONIX-and-MARC21">
http://www.editeur.org/96/ONIX-and-MARC21</a><br>
- METS-PREMISE in RDF <a href=3D"http://www.loc.gov/standards/premis/pif-pr=
esentations-2012/PREMIS-OWL-iPRES2012.pdf">
http://www.loc.gov/standards/premis/pif-presentations-2012/PREMIS-OWL-iPRES=
2012.pdf</a><br>
- EAD to Europeana Data Model RDF <a href=3D"http://pro.europeana.eu/docume=
nts/900548/559c18d6-e5f3-410a-9e3e-7ee74f87c302">
http://pro.europeana.eu/documents/900548/559c18d6-e5f3-410a-9e3e-7ee74f87c3=
02</a><br>
- ...<br>
<br>
The results would be very interesting to see them aligned to Bibframe eleme=
nts.<br>
<br>
A wider perspective would be aligning the DataCite RDF <a href=3D"https://d=
ocs.google.com/document/d/1paJgvmCMu3pbM4in6PjWAKO0gP-6ultii3DWQslygq4/edit=
?authkey=3DCMeV3tgF&amp;hl=3Den_GB">
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1paJgvmCMu3pbM4in6PjWAKO0gP-6ultii3DWQsl=
ygq4/edit?authkey=3DCMeV3tgF&amp;hl=3Den_GB</a> to Bibframe. This would exc=
eed the traditional MARC scope and would reveal the power of RDF by integra=
ting research data environments seamlessly
 with Bibframe'd library catalog metadata.<br>
<br>
Also expanding the view to publisher activities is helpful to get some impr=
essions for what could be done if there was Bibframe-powered data. I saw
<a href=3D"http://prezi.com/yc35ccin0ipg/discovering-and-using-rdf-at-oreil=
ly-media/">
http://prezi.com/yc35ccin0ipg/discovering-and-using-rdf-at-oreilly-media/</=
a> for an experience of a publisher when traveling a market-driven path usi=
ng RDF on XML-based metadata.<br>
<br>
J=F6rg<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>

--_000_768F135D8DFF3A4A9E4BFF0549723FD953BFD137ILEXM02CorpExli_--

------------------------------

Date:    Wed, 13 Mar 2013 15:53:13 +0000
From:    Michael Hopwood <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Reuse (or not) of existing ontologies

--_000_F61A8945B05715448AF2221FB6080925076AB4246BEX27MAIL03msg_
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

From my point of view, it seems there are two things to maintain:


1)      Your own vocabulary (even if it is substantially made up of re-used=
 terms, it still has its own identity)

2)      Mappings to others' vocabularies

C.f. http://www.doi.org/VMF/documents/VocabularyMappingFrameworkIntroductio=
nV1.0%28091212%29.pdf

>>> Well, you align the vocabularies through RDFS, OWL, or something simila=
r...

>>> the argument against using existing vocabularies vs. rolling your own a=
nd aligning them is that you can't control the fate of vocabularies you don=
't own.  So if something happens to them (properties get deprecated/replace=
d, domain registrations lapse, etc.), you still have control of the predica=
tes/classes you are using and can realign them as necessary...

--_000_F61A8945B05715448AF2221FB6080925076AB4246BEX27MAIL03msg_
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<html xmlns:v=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o=3D"urn:schemas-micr=
osoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" =
xmlns:m=3D"http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns=3D"http:=
//www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=
=3D"text/html; charset=3Dus-ascii"><meta name=3DGenerator content=3D"Micros=
oft Word 14 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
	{font-family:Calibri;
	panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
	{margin:0cm;
	margin-bottom:.0001pt;
	font-size:12.0pt;
	font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
	{mso-style-priority:99;
	color:blue;
	text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
	{mso-style-priority:99;
	color:purple;
	text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoListParagraph, li.MsoListParagraph, div.MsoListParagraph
	{mso-style-priority:34;
	margin-top:0cm;
	margin-right:0cm;
	margin-bottom:0cm;
	margin-left:36.0pt;
	margin-bottom:.0001pt;
	font-size:12.0pt;
	font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
span.apple-style-span
	{mso-style-name:apple-style-span;}
span.EmailStyle18
	{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
	font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
	color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
	{mso-style-type:export-only;
	font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
	{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
	margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
	{page:WordSection1;}
/* List Definitions */
@list l0
	{mso-list-id:730469652;
	mso-list-type:hybrid;
	mso-list-template-ids:273682096 134807569 134807577 134807579 134807567 13=
4807577 134807579 134807567 134807577 134807579;}
@list l0:level1
	{mso-level-text:"%1\)";
	mso-level-tab-stop:none;
	mso-level-number-position:left;
	text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level2
	{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
	mso-level-tab-stop:none;
	mso-level-number-position:left;
	text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level3
	{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
	mso-level-tab-stop:none;
	mso-level-number-position:right;
	text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l0:level4
	{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
	mso-level-number-position:left;
	text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level5
	{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
	mso-level-tab-stop:none;
	mso-level-number-position:left;
	text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level6
	{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
	mso-level-tab-stop:none;
	mso-level-number-position:right;
	text-indent:-9.0pt;}
@list l0:level7
	{mso-level-tab-stop:none;
	mso-level-number-position:left;
	text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level8
	{mso-level-number-format:alpha-lower;
	mso-level-tab-stop:none;
	mso-level-number-position:left;
	text-indent:-18.0pt;}
@list l0:level9
	{mso-level-number-format:roman-lower;
	mso-level-tab-stop:none;
	mso-level-number-position:right;
	text-indent:-9.0pt;}
ol
	{margin-bottom:0cm;}
ul
	{margin-bottom:0cm;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext=3D"edit" spidmax=3D"1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext=3D"edit">
<o:idmap v:ext=3D"edit" data=3D"1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=3DEN-GB link=3Dblue vli=
nk=3Dpurple><div class=3DWordSection1><p class=3DMsoNormal><span style=3D'c=
olor:#1F497D'>From my point of view, it seems there are two things to maint=
ain:<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=3DMsoNormal><span style=3D'font-size:11.=
0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></sp=
an></p><p class=3DMsoListParagraph style=3D'text-indent:-18.0pt;mso-list:l0=
 level1 lfo1'><![if !supportLists]><span style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-fam=
ily:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><span style=3D'mso-list:Ignore'>1=
)<span style=3D'font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"'>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp=
; </span></span></span><![endif]><span style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-famil=
y:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Your own vocabulary (even if it is =
substantially made up of re-used terms, it still has its own identity)<o:p>=
</o:p></span></p><p class=3DMsoListParagraph style=3D'text-indent:-18.0pt;m=
so-list:l0 level1 lfo1'><![if !supportLists]><span style=3D'font-size:11.0p=
t;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><span style=3D'mso-list=
:Ignore'>2)<span style=3D'font:7.0pt "Times New Roman"'>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&=
nbsp;&nbsp; </span></span></span><![endif]><span style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;=
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Mappings to others&#8217;=
 vocabularies<o:p></o:p></span></p><div><p class=3DMsoNormal><span style=3D=
'color:#1F497D'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p><p class=3DMsoNormal><span styl=
e=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>C.f=
. <a href=3D"http://www.doi.org/VMF/documents/VocabularyMappingFrameworkInt=
roductionV1.0%28091212%29.pdf">http://www.doi.org/VMF/documents/VocabularyM=
appingFrameworkIntroductionV1.0%28091212%29.pdf</a> <o:p></o:p></span></p><=
p class=3DMsoNormal><span style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","=
sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p></div><p class=3DMso=
Normal><span style=3D'color:#1F497D'>&gt;&gt;&gt; </span>Well, you align th=
e vocabularies through RDFS, OWL, or something similar<span style=3D'color:=
#1F497D'>&#8230;</span><br><br><span style=3D'color:#1F497D'><o:p></o:p></s=
pan></p><p class=3DMsoNormal><span style=3D'color:#1F497D'>&gt;&gt;&gt; </s=
pan>the argument against using existing vocabularies vs. rolling your own a=
nd aligning them is that you can't control the fate of vocabularies you don=
't own. &nbsp;So if something happens to them (properties get deprecated/re=
placed, domain registrations lapse, etc.), you still have control of the pr=
edicates/classes you are using and can realign them as necessary<span style=
=3D'color:#1F497D'>&#8230;<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></body></html>=

--_000_F61A8945B05715448AF2221FB6080925076AB4246BEX27MAIL03msg_--

------------------------------

Date:    Wed, 13 Mar 2013 08:55:12 -0700
From:    Karen Coyle <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Reuse (or not) of existing ontologies

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------050800080309060804030705
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Along with Ross and Shlomo I am concerned that the theory of RDF/OWL and 
the actual practice may not meet in the foreseeable future. While it is 
absolutely logical to have:

RDA:parallelTitle -> subclassOf ->RDA:titleProper-> subclassOf 
->dcterms:title [1]

I'm still waiting to see a solution that implements this, and implements 
it simply and efficiently.

Another possibility, however, to "using" existing ontologies is to see 
library data as having a library-facing view inside library systems, but 
a public-facing view that it shows to the web. The public-facing view 
*would* use the common vocabularies. It would have less precision than 
"proper" library data, but would be understood by the web public.

I see this as a solution because it seems highly unlikely that libraries 
will accept the less precise vocabularies used by others.

kc

[1] In particular because you can also have:

foaf:name -> subclassOf -> dcterms:title

since the definition of dcterms:title is " A name given to the 
resource." and anything -- documents, towns, people, chairs -- can be a 
resource.

On 3/13/13 7:32 AM, Shlomo Sanders wrote:
>
> "The downside is that it would require a fair amount of 
> inference/reasoning to work, which is currently fairly unrealistic 
> (not impossible, just unrealistic for widespread adoption) which I 
> don't expect to change any time in the near future."
>
> In short, it can work but will be expensive for vendors to develop, 
> complicated and expensive for Libraries to use...
>
> Instead we should works towards a common vocabulary for the _most 
> important core information_.
>
> At least for some of the core stuff... bibo, dc, foaf, etc.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Shlomo
>
> Experience the all-new, singing and dancing interactive Primo brochure 
> <http://www.exlibrispublications.com/primo/>
>
> *From:*Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum 
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] *On Behalf Of *Ross Singer
> *Sent:* Wednesday, March 13, 2013 15:56
> *To:* [log in to unmask]
> *Subject:* Re: [BIBFRAME] Reuse (or not) of existing ontologies
>
> On Mar 13, 2013, at 9:36 AM, Shlomo Sanders 
> <[log in to unmask] 
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>
>
>
> How can linking to RDF actually work in real life if each group has 
> their on vocabulary?
>
> Well, you align the vocabularies through RDFS, OWL, or something similar.
>
> Good RDF In and display in browser, sure that will work.
>
> But programmatic use of the data when there is no standard (or even 
> close to a standard) vocabulary?
>
> Well, this is exactly why one would propose RDF, simply because you 
> *can* explicitly align the vocabularies.  The downside is that it 
> would require a fair amount of inference/reasoning to work, which is 
> currently fairly unrealistic (not impossible, just unrealistic for 
> widespread adoption) which I don't expect to change any time in the 
> near future.
>
> -Ross.
>
>     Thanks,
>
>     Shlomo
>
>     Sent from my iPad
>
>
>     On Mar 13, 2013, at 15:00, "Ross Singer" <[log in to unmask]
>     <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>
>         Owen, I can't speak for Bibframe directly, but in the case,
>         say, of RDA, the argument against using existing vocabularies
>         vs. rolling your own and aligning them is that you can't
>         control the fate of vocabularies you don't own.  So if
>         something happens to them (properties get deprecated/replaced,
>         domain registrations lapse, etc.), you still have control of
>         the predicates/classes you are using and can realign them as
>         necessary.
>
>         Not saying that I necessarily subscribe to that philosophy
>         (although I see its merits), but I think that is probably the
>         argument.
>
>         -Ross.
>
>         On Mar 13, 2013, at 5:39 AM, Owen Stephens <[log in to unmask]
>         <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>
>
>
>         Thanks for this Jörg
>
>         While obviously plans to align bibframe elements to other RDF
>         ontologies would be welcome, I'd be very interested to
>         understand that arguments against simply adopting existing
>         vocabularies where they exist?
>
>         Owen
>
>         Owen Stephens
>
>         Owen Stephens Consulting
>
>         Web: http://www.ostephens.com <http://www.ostephens.com/>
>         Email: [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>         Telephone: 0121 288 6936
>
>         On 12 Mar 2013, at 09:23, Jörg Prante <[log in to unmask]
>         <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>
>
>
>         From my understanding, there will be a process of "alignment"
>         of Bibframe elements to other RDF elements. In the current
>         phase of early Bibframe developement, I assume the focus is
>         still on creating native Bibframe elements and vocabulary.
>
>         There have been some work closely related to Bibframe
>
>         - the W3C provenance incubator group charter
>         http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/prov/charter
>         - ONIX for Marc21 and for RDA (ONIX in RDF still ongoing
>         work?) http://www.editeur.org/96/ONIX-and-MARC21
>         - METS-PREMISE in RDF
>         http://www.loc.gov/standards/premis/pif-presentations-2012/PREMIS-OWL-iPRES2012.pdf
>         - EAD to Europeana Data Model RDF
>         http://pro.europeana.eu/documents/900548/559c18d6-e5f3-410a-9e3e-7ee74f87c302
>         - ...
>
>         The results would be very interesting to see them aligned to
>         Bibframe elements.
>
>         A wider perspective would be aligning the DataCite RDF
>         https://docs.google.com/document/d/1paJgvmCMu3pbM4in6PjWAKO0gP-6ultii3DWQslygq4/edit?authkey=CMeV3tgF&hl=en_GB
>         to Bibframe. This would exceed the traditional MARC scope and
>         would reveal the power of RDF by integrating research data
>         environments seamlessly with Bibframe'd library catalog metadata.
>
>         Also expanding the view to publisher activities is helpful to
>         get some impressions for what could be done if there was
>         Bibframe-powered data. I saw
>         http://prezi.com/yc35ccin0ipg/discovering-and-using-rdf-at-oreilly-media/
>         for an experience of a publisher when traveling a
>         market-driven path using RDF on XML-based metadata.
>
>         Jörg
>

-- 
Karen Coyle
[log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net
ph: 1-510-540-7596
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet


--------------050800080309060804030705
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<html>
  <head>
    <meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
      http-equiv="Content-Type">
  </head>
  <body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
    Along with Ross and Shlomo I am concerned that the theory of RDF/OWL
    and the actual practice may not meet in the foreseeable future.
    While it is absolutely logical to have:<br>
    <br>
    RDA:parallelTitle -&gt; subclassOf -&gt;RDA:titleProper-&gt;
    subclassOf -&gt;dcterms:title [1]<br>
    <br>
    I'm still waiting to see a solution that implements this, and
    implements it simply and efficiently. <br>
    <br>
    Another possibility, however, to "using" existing ontologies is to
    see library data as having a library-facing view inside library
    systems, but a public-facing view that it shows to the web. The
    public-facing view *would* use the common vocabularies. It would
    have less precision than "proper" library data, but would be
    understood by the web public. <br>
    <br>
    I see this as a solution because it seems highly unlikely that
    libraries will accept the less precise vocabularies used by others.<br>
    <br>
    kc<br>
    <br>
    [1] In particular because you can also have:<br>
    <br>
    foaf:name -&gt; subclassOf -&gt; dcterms:title<br>
    <br>
    since the definition of dcterms:title is "
    <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;
      charset=ISO-8859-1">
    A name given to the resource." and anything -- documents, towns,
    people, chairs -- can be a resource.<br>
    <br>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 3/13/13 7:32 AM, Shlomo Sanders
      wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:[log in to unmask]"
      type="cite">
      <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
        charset=ISO-8859-1">
      <meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered
        medium)">
      <style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
	{font-family:Helvetica;
	panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;}
@font-face
	{font-family:Helvetica;
	panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;}
@font-face
	{font-family:Calibri;
	panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
	{font-family:Tahoma;
	panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
	{margin:0in;
	margin-bottom:.0001pt;
	font-size:12.0pt;
	font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
	{mso-style-priority:99;
	color:blue;
	text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
	{mso-style-priority:99;
	color:purple;
	text-decoration:underline;}
code
	{mso-style-priority:99;
	font-family:"Courier New";}
span.apple-style-span
	{mso-style-name:apple-style-span;}
span.EmailStyle18
	{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
	font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
	color:#1F497D;}
span.apple-converted-space
	{mso-style-name:apple-converted-space;}
.MsoChpDefault
	{mso-style-type:export-only;
	font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
	{size:8.5in 11.0in;
	margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;}
div.WordSection1
	{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
      <div class="WordSection1">
        <p class="MsoNormal">&#8220;The downside is that it would require a
          fair amount of inference/reasoning to work, which is currently
          fairly unrealistic (not impossible, just unrealistic for
          widespread adoption) which I don't expect to change any time
          in the near future.&#8221;<o:p></o:p></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal">In short, it can work but will be expensive
          for vendors to develop, complicated and expensive for
          Libraries to use&#8230;<o:p></o:p></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal">Instead we should works towards a common
          vocabulary for the <u>
            most important core information</u>.<o:p></o:p></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal">At least for some of the core stuff&#8230; bibo,
          dc, foaf, etc.<o:p></o:p></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
        <div>
          <p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1F497D">Thanks,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1F497D">Shlomo<o:p></o:p></span></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1F497D"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>
          <p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1F497D">Experience
              the all-new, singing and dancing interactive
              <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                href="http://www.exlibrispublications.com/primo/">Primo
                brochure</a> <o:p></o:p></span></p>
        </div>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1F497D"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>
        <div>
          <div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF
            1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
            <p class="MsoNormal"><b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:&quot;Tahoma&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;">From:</span></b><span
style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:&quot;Tahoma&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;">
                Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum
                [<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="mailto:[log in to unmask]">mailto:[log in to unmask]</a>]
                <b>On Behalf Of </b>Ross Singer<br>
                <b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, March 13, 2013 15:56<br>
                <b>To:</b> <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]</a><br>
                <b>Subject:</b> Re: [BIBFRAME] Reuse (or not) of
                existing ontologies<o:p></o:p></span></p>
          </div>
        </div>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
        <div>
          <div>
            <p class="MsoNormal">On Mar 13, 2013, at 9:36 AM, Shlomo
              Sanders &lt;<a moz-do-not-send="true"
                href="mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]</a>&gt;
              wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
          </div>
          <p class="MsoNormal"><br>
            <br>
            <o:p></o:p></p>
          <div>
            <div>
              <p class="MsoNormal">How can linking to RDF actually work
                in real life if each group has their on vocabulary?<o:p></o:p></p>
            </div>
          </div>
          <div>
            <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
          </div>
          <p class="MsoNormal">Well, you align the vocabularies through
            RDFS, OWL, or something similar.<br>
            <br>
            <o:p></o:p></p>
          <div>
            <div>
              <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
            </div>
            <div>
              <p class="MsoNormal">Good RDF In and display in browser,
                sure that will work.<o:p></o:p></p>
            </div>
            <div>
              <p class="MsoNormal">But programmatic use of the data when
                there is no standard (or even close to a standard)
                vocabulary?<o:p></o:p></p>
            </div>
          </div>
          <div>
            <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
          </div>
          <p class="MsoNormal">Well, this is exactly why one would
            propose RDF, simply because you *can* explicitly align the
            vocabularies. &nbsp;The downside is that it would require a fair
            amount of inference/reasoning to work, which is currently
            fairly unrealistic (not impossible, just unrealistic for
            widespread adoption) which I don't expect to change any time
            in the near future.<o:p></o:p></p>
        </div>
        <div>
          <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
        </div>
        <div>
          <p class="MsoNormal">-Ross.<o:p></o:p></p>
        </div>
        <div>
          <blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
            <div>
              <div>
                <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
                <div>
                  <p class="MsoNormal">Thanks,<o:p></o:p></p>
                </div>
                <p class="MsoNormal">Shlomo <o:p></o:p></p>
                <div>
                  <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
                </div>
                <div>
                  <p class="MsoNormal">Sent from my iPad<o:p></o:p></p>
                </div>
              </div>
              <div>
                <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><br>
                  On Mar 13, 2013, at 15:00, "Ross Singer" &lt;<a
                    moz-do-not-send="true"
                    href="mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]</a>&gt;
                  wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
              </div>
              <blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
                <div>
                  <p class="MsoNormal">Owen, I can't speak for Bibframe
                    directly, but in the case, say, of RDA, the argument
                    against using existing vocabularies vs. rolling your
                    own and aligning them is that you can't control the
                    fate of vocabularies you don't own. &nbsp;So if something
                    happens to them (properties get deprecated/replaced,
                    domain registrations lapse, etc.), you still have
                    control of the predicates/classes you are using and
                    can realign them as necessary.
                    <o:p></o:p></p>
                  <div>
                    <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
                  </div>
                  <div>
                    <p class="MsoNormal">Not saying that I necessarily
                      subscribe to that philosophy (although I see its
                      merits), but I think that is probably the
                      argument.<o:p></o:p></p>
                  </div>
                  <div>
                    <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
                  </div>
                  <div>
                    <p class="MsoNormal">-Ross.<o:p></o:p></p>
                    <div>
                      <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
                    </div>
                    <div>
                      <div>
                        <div>
                          <p class="MsoNormal">On Mar 13, 2013, at 5:39
                            AM, Owen Stephens &lt;<a
                              moz-do-not-send="true"
                              href="mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]</a>&gt;
                            wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
                        </div>
                        <p class="MsoNormal"><br>
                          <br>
                          <o:p></o:p></p>
                        <div>
                          <p class="MsoNormal">Thanks for this J&ouml;rg <o:p></o:p></p>
                          <div>
                            <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
                          </div>
                          <div>
                            <p class="MsoNormal">While obviously plans
                              to align bibframe elements to other RDF
                              ontologies would be welcome, I'd be very
                              interested to understand that arguments
                              against simply adopting existing
                              vocabularies where they exist?<o:p></o:p></p>
                          </div>
                          <div>
                            <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
                          </div>
                          <div>
                            <p class="MsoNormal">Owen<o:p></o:p></p>
                          </div>
                          <div>
                            <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
                            <div>
                              <div>
                                <div>
                                  <p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:13.5pt;font-family:&quot;Helvetica&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;">Owen
                                      Stephens<o:p></o:p></span></p>
                                </div>
                                <p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:13.5pt;font-family:&quot;Helvetica&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;">Owen
                                    Stephens Consulting<o:p></o:p></span></p>
                              </div>
                              <div>
                                <p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:13.5pt;font-family:&quot;Helvetica&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;">Web:
                                    <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                                      href="http://www.ostephens.com/">http://www.ostephens.com</a><br>
                                    Email: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                                      href="mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]</a><br>
                                    Telephone: 0121 288 6936<o:p></o:p></span></p>
                              </div>
                            </div>
                            <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
                            <div>
                              <div>
                                <p class="MsoNormal">On 12 Mar 2013, at
                                  09:23, J&ouml;rg Prante &lt;<a
                                    moz-do-not-send="true"
                                    href="mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]</a>&gt;
                                  wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
                              </div>
                              <p class="MsoNormal"><br>
                                <br>
                                <o:p></o:p></p>
                              <p class="MsoNormal">From my
                                understanding, there will be a process
                                of "alignment" of Bibframe elements to
                                other RDF elements. In the current phase
                                of early Bibframe developement, I assume
                                the focus is still on creating native
                                Bibframe elements and vocabulary.<br>
                                <br>
                                There have been some work closely
                                related to Bibframe<br>
                                <br>
                                - the W3C provenance incubator group
                                charter <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                                  href="http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/prov/charter">
http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/prov/charter</a><br>
                                - ONIX for Marc21 and for RDA (ONIX in
                                RDF still ongoing work?) <a
                                  moz-do-not-send="true"
                                  href="http://www.editeur.org/96/ONIX-and-MARC21">
http://www.editeur.org/96/ONIX-and-MARC21</a><br>
                                - METS-PREMISE in RDF <a
                                  moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.loc.gov/standards/premis/pif-presentations-2012/PREMIS-OWL-iPRES2012.pdf">http://www.loc.gov/standards/premis/pif-presentations-2012/PREMIS-OWL-iPRES2012.pdf</a><br>
                                - EAD to Europeana Data Model RDF <a
                                  moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://pro.europeana.eu/documents/900548/559c18d6-e5f3-410a-9e3e-7ee74f87c302">http://pro.europeana.eu/documents/900548/559c18d6-e5f3-410a-9e3e-7ee74f87c302</a><br>
                                - ...<br>
                                <br>
                                The results would be very interesting to
                                see them aligned to Bibframe elements.<br>
                                <br>
                                A wider perspective would be aligning
                                the DataCite RDF <a
                                  moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://docs.google.com/document/d/1paJgvmCMu3pbM4in6PjWAKO0gP-6ultii3DWQslygq4/edit?authkey=CMeV3tgF&amp;hl=en_GB">https://docs.google.com/document/d/1paJgvmCMu3pbM4in6PjWAKO0gP-6ultii3DWQslygq4/edit?authkey=CMeV3tgF&amp;hl=en_GB</a>
                                to Bibframe. This would exceed the
                                traditional MARC scope and would reveal
                                the power of RDF by integrating research
                                data environments seamlessly with
                                Bibframe'd library catalog metadata.<br>
                                <br>
                                Also expanding the view to publisher
                                activities is helpful to get some
                                impressions for what could be done if
                                there was Bibframe-powered data. I saw
                                <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://prezi.com/yc35ccin0ipg/discovering-and-using-rdf-at-oreilly-media/">http://prezi.com/yc35ccin0ipg/discovering-and-using-rdf-at-oreilly-media/</a>
                                for an experience of a publisher when
                                traveling a market-driven path using RDF
                                on XML-based metadata.<br>
                                <br>
                                J&ouml;rg<o:p></o:p></p>
                            </div>
                            <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
                          </div>
                        </div>
                      </div>
                      <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
                    </div>
                  </div>
                </div>
              </blockquote>
            </div>
          </blockquote>
        </div>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
    <pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">-- 
Karen Coyle
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]</a> <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://kcoyle.net">http://kcoyle.net</a>
ph: 1-510-540-7596
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet</pre>
  </body>
</html>

--------------050800080309060804030705--

------------------------------

Date:    Wed, 13 Mar 2013 16:11:17 +0000
From:    "Akerman, Laura" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Reuse (or not) of existing ontologies

--_000_AFA735FA6EE5C24A8C68FCF33E33040064504CE2e14mbx21wEnterp_
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Do we have any data - how many linked data providers use the "common" vocab=
ularies like dc, foaf, etc. to relate to those kinds of entities, versus us=
ing something else or making their own vocabulary?

It seems to me that those vocabularies became common because they were usef=
ul and they were THERE (bless them) for early linked data pioneers to use.

In future, other vocabularies might gain ascendancy, particularly if more a=
pplications that now are based on XML or relational databases, started publ=
ishing their data as linked data and using something different.. (maybe eve=
n... BIBFRAME).  Or, coalescence around a central vocabulary might not happ=
en, (or might happen on at a very high level, like SUMO) and instead the nu=
mber of vocabularies would multiply....

...but a pool of available property and class vocabulary relationship "mapp=
ings" would become available to stitch things together.

This is an argument that's been going on a long time (multiplicity of model=
s...  fitted to individual conceptualizations of the world, vs. "standardiz=
ation"), and there's a lot of pull in both directions.

I can see the wisdom, for BIBFRAME, in defining its own vocabulary...

...and then provide a "mapping out" (using owl:sameAs or other relationship=
s) to other vocabularies.

I think that would accomplish what we want to do.   We are talking about ma=
king library metadata more available to the rest of the world - in terms it=
 can use and understand, while also making the world's data more available =
to libraries.

But, core functions of BIBFRAME have to be, to support current library serv=
ices, and also to carry forward the legacy data from MARC, and I think this=
 should have more weight.   We need definitions that really work for us.

Can't we have our cake, and eat it too?   I am not sure about how expensive=
...  we are just talking about more triples that describe the vocabulary re=
lationships, right?

There would be new tools, certainly, to help people to make the mappings an=
d logical relationships, and people-time to do the mapping.

And of course, we who have done metadata munging from one schema to another=
 know mapping isn't always easy, and (I have read and believe!) there is da=
nger in that "sameAs".  What is same for me (or subproperty...) may not be =
for you...

What is the "expensive" part of reasoning...  Are we talking computer expen=
sive?  As in, response time, memory, storage space... ?

Of course, there is an attractive efficiency in using a common vocabulary t=
o accomplish the same tasks.  I'm not suggesting that each =ADlibrary come =
up with its own basic ontology.  But RDF gives so much flexibility; I would=
 hate to try to shoehorn our data into a vocabulary developed elsewhere for=
 a different purpose, if we don't have to.   We need to be open to possibil=
ities of expanding the types of services we may provide by linking to diffe=
rent types of data than what we've had in the past (and maybe, expanding or=
 enhancing vocabularies too!).  The more clarity and understanding we have =
about what our data represents, the better we will be able to build these s=
ervices.

Meanwhile, where is that shared pool of RDF vocabulary mappings?

Laura

From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum [mailto:BIBFRAME@=
LISTSERV.LOC.GOV] On Behalf Of Shlomo Sanders
Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2013 10:33 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [BIBFRAME] Reuse (or not) of existing ontologies

"The downside is that it would require a fair amount of inference/reasoning=
 to work, which is currently fairly unrealistic (not impossible, just unrea=
listic for widespread adoption) which I don't expect to change any time in =
the near future."

In short, it can work but will be expensive for vendors to develop, complic=
ated and expensive for Libraries to use...

Instead we should works towards a common vocabulary for the most important =
core information.
At least for some of the core stuff... bibo, dc, foaf, etc.


Thanks,
Shlomo

Experience the all-new, singing and dancing interactive Primo brochure<http=
://www.exlibrispublications.com/primo/>

From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum [mailto:BIBFRAME@=
LISTSERV.LOC.GOV] On Behalf Of Ross Singer
Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2013 15:56
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: [BIBFRAME] Reuse (or not) of existing ontologies

On Mar 13, 2013, at 9:36 AM, Shlomo Sanders <[log in to unmask]
OM<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:

How can linking to RDF actually work in real life if each group has their o=
n vocabulary?

Well, you align the vocabularies through RDFS, OWL, or something similar.

Good RDF In and display in browser, sure that will work.
But programmatic use of the data when there is no standard (or even close t=
o a standard) vocabulary?

Well, this is exactly why one would propose RDF, simply because you *can* e=
xplicitly align the vocabularies.  The downside is that it would require a =
fair amount of inference/reasoning to work, which is currently fairly unrea=
listic (not impossible, just unrealistic for widespread adoption) which I d=
on't expect to change any time in the near future.

-Ross.

Thanks,
Shlomo

Sent from my iPad

On Mar 13, 2013, at 15:00, "Ross Singer" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:ross=
[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
Owen, I can't speak for Bibframe directly, but in the case, say, of RDA, th=
e argument against using existing vocabularies vs. rolling your own and ali=
gning them is that you can't control the fate of vocabularies you don't own=
.  So if something happens to them (properties get deprecated/replaced, dom=
ain registrations lapse, etc.), you still have control of the predicates/cl=
asses you are using and can realign them as necessary.

Not saying that I necessarily subscribe to that philosophy (although I see =
its merits), but I think that is probably the argument.

-Ross.

On Mar 13, 2013, at 5:39 AM, Owen Stephens <[log in to unmask]<mailto:owen@=
OSTEPHENS.COM>> wrote:

Thanks for this J=F6rg

While obviously plans to align bibframe elements to other RDF ontologies wo=
uld be welcome, I'd be very interested to understand that arguments against=
 simply adopting existing vocabularies where they exist?

Owen

Owen Stephens
Owen Stephens Consulting
Web: http://www.ostephens.com<http://www.ostephens.com/>
Email: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Telephone: 0121 288 6936

On 12 Mar 2013, at 09:23, J=F6rg Prante <[log in to unmask]<mailto:joerg=
[log in to unmask]>> wrote:

From my understanding, there will be a process of "alignment" of Bibframe e=
lements to other RDF elements. In the current phase of early Bibframe devel=
opement, I assume the focus is still on creating native Bibframe elements a=
nd vocabulary.

There have been some work closely related to Bibframe

- the W3C provenance incubator group charter http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubat=
or/prov/charter
- ONIX for Marc21 and for RDA (ONIX in RDF still ongoing work?) http://www.=
editeur.org/96/ONIX-and-MARC21
- METS-PREMISE in RDF http://www.loc.gov/standards/premis/pif-presentations=
-2012/PREMIS-OWL-iPRES2012.pdf
- EAD to Europeana Data Model RDF http://pro.europeana.eu/documents/900548/=
559c18d6-e5f3-410a-9e3e-7ee74f87c302
- ...

The results would be very interesting to see them aligned to Bibframe eleme=
nts.

A wider perspective would be aligning the DataCite RDF https://docs.google.=
com/document/d/1paJgvmCMu3pbM4in6PjWAKO0gP-6ultii3DWQslygq4/edit?authkey=3D=
CMeV3tgF&hl=3Den_GB to Bibframe. This would exceed the traditional MARC sco=
pe and would reveal the power of RDF by integrating research data environme=
nts seamlessly with Bibframe'd library catalog metadata.

Also expanding the view to publisher activities is helpful to get some impr=
essions for what could be done if there was Bibframe-powered data. I saw ht=
tp://prezi.com/yc35ccin0ipg/discovering-and-using-rdf-at-oreilly-media/ for=
 an experience of a publisher when traveling a market-driven path using RDF=
 on XML-based metadata.

J=F6rg




________________________________

This e-mail message (including any attachments) is for the sole use of
the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged
information. If the reader of this message is not the intended
recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution
or copying of this message (including any attachments) is strictly
prohibited.

If you have received this message in error, please contact
the sender by reply e-mail message and destroy all copies of the
original message (including attachments).

--_000_AFA735FA6EE5C24A8C68FCF33E33040064504CE2e14mbx21wEnterp_
Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv=3D"Content-Type" content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-8859-=
1">
<style>
<!--
@font-face
	{font-family:Helvetica}
@font-face
	{font-family:Helvetica}
@font-face
	{font-family:Calibri}
@font-face
	{font-family:Tahoma}
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
	{margin:0in;
	margin-bottom:.0001pt;
	font-size:12.0pt;
	font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
	{color:blue;
	text-decoration:underline}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
	{color:purple;
	text-decoration:underline}
code
	{font-family:"Courier New"}
span.apple-style-span
	{}
span.EmailStyle19
	{font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
	color:#1F497D}
span.apple-converted-space
	{}
span.EmailStyle21
	{color:black}
.MsoChpDefault
	{font-size:10.0pt}
@page WordSection1
	{margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in}
div.WordSection1
	{}
-->
</style>
</head>
<body lang=3D"EN-US" link=3D"blue" vlink=3D"purple">
<div class=3D"WordSection1">
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"color:black">Do we have any data - ho=
w many linked data providers use the &quot;common&quot; vocabularies like d=
c, foaf, etc. to relate to those kinds of entities, versus using something =
else or making their own vocabulary?</span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"color:black">&nbsp;</span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"color:black">It seems to me that thos=
e vocabularies became common because they were useful and they were THERE (=
bless them) for early linked data pioneers to use. &nbsp;</span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"color:black">&nbsp;</span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"color:black">In future, other vocabul=
aries might gain ascendancy, particularly if more applications that now are=
 based on XML or relational databases, started publishing their data as lin=
ked data and using something different..
 (maybe even... BIBFRAME).&nbsp; Or, coalescence around a central vocabular=
y might not happen, (or might happen on at a very high level, like SUMO) an=
d instead the number of vocabularies would multiply....</span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"color:black">&nbsp;</span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"color:black">...but a pool of availab=
le property and class vocabulary relationship &quot;mappings&quot; would be=
come available to stitch things together.&nbsp;
</span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"color:black">&nbsp;</span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"color:black">This is an argument that=
's been going on a long time (multiplicity of models...&nbsp; fitted to ind=
ividual conceptualizations of the world, vs. &quot;standardization&quot;), =
and there's a lot of pull in both directions. &nbsp;</span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"color:black">&nbsp;</span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"color:black">I can see the wisdom, fo=
r BIBFRAME, in defining its own vocabulary...
</span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"color:black">&nbsp;</span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"color:black">...and then provide a &q=
uot;mapping out&quot; (using owl:sameAs or other relationships) to other vo=
cabularies.&nbsp;
</span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"color:black">&nbsp;</span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"color:black">I think that would accom=
plish what we want to do.&nbsp; &nbsp;We are talking about making library m=
etadata more available to the rest of the world - in terms it can use and u=
nderstand, while also making the world's data
 more available to libraries.&nbsp; </span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"color:black">&nbsp;</span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"color:black">But, core functions of B=
IBFRAME have to be, to support current library services, and also to carry =
forward the legacy data from MARC, and I think this should have more weight=
. &nbsp;&nbsp;We need definitions that really
 work for us.&nbsp; </span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"color:black">&nbsp;</span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"color:black">Can't we have our cake, =
and eat it too? &nbsp;&nbsp;I am not sure about how expensive...&nbsp; we a=
re just talking about more triples that describe the vocabulary relationshi=
ps, right?
</span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"color:black">&nbsp;</span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"color:black">There would be new tools=
, certainly, to help people to make the mappings and logical relationships,=
 and people-time to do the mapping.&nbsp;
</span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"color:black">&nbsp;</span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"color:black">And of course, we who ha=
ve done metadata munging from one schema to another know mapping isn't alwa=
ys easy, and (I have read and believe!) there is danger in that &quot;sameA=
s&quot;.&nbsp; What is same for me (or subproperty...)
 may not be for you...</span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"color:black">&nbsp;</span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"color:black">What is the &quot;expens=
ive&quot; part of reasoning...&nbsp; Are we talking computer expensive?&nbs=
p; As in, response time, memory, storage space... ?</span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"color:black">&nbsp;</span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"color:black">Of course, there is an a=
ttractive efficiency in using a common vocabulary to accomplish the same ta=
sks. &nbsp;I'm not suggesting that each =ADlibrary come up with its own bas=
ic ontology. &nbsp;But RDF gives so much flexibility;
 I would hate to try to shoehorn our data into a vocabulary developed elsew=
here for a different purpose, if we don't have to.&nbsp; &nbsp;We need to b=
e open to possibilities of expanding the types of services we may provide b=
y linking to different types of data than
 what we've had in the past (and maybe, expanding or enhancing vocabularies=
 too!).&nbsp; The more clarity and understanding we have about what our dat=
a represents, the better we will be able to build these services.</span></p=
>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"color:black">&nbsp;</span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"color:black">Meanwhile, where is that=
 shared pool of RDF vocabulary mappings?</span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"color:black">&nbsp;</span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"color:black">Laura</span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"color:black">&nbsp;</span></p>
<div>
<div style=3D"border:none; border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt; padding:3.0pt 0i=
n 0in 0in">
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in"><b><span style=3D"font-si=
ze:10.0pt; font-family:&quot;Tahoma&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;">From:</sp=
an></b><span style=3D"font-size:10.0pt; font-family:&quot;Tahoma&quot;,&quo=
t;sans-serif&quot;"> Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum [m=
ailto:[log in to unmask]]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Shlomo Sanders<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, March 13, 2013 10:33 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> [log in to unmask]<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [BIBFRAME] Reuse (or not) of existing ontologies</span>=
</p>
</div>
</div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in">&nbsp;</p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in">&#8220;The downside is th=
at it would require a fair amount of inference/reasoning to work, which is =
currently fairly unrealistic (not impossible, just unrealistic for widespre=
ad adoption) which I don't expect to change
 any time in the near future.&#8221;</p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in">&nbsp;</p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in">In short, it can work but=
 will be expensive for vendors to develop, complicated and expensive for Li=
braries to use&#8230;</p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in">&nbsp;</p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in">Instead we should works t=
owards a common vocabulary for the
<u>most important core information</u>.</p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in">At least for some of the =
core stuff&#8230; bibo, dc, foaf, etc.</p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in">&nbsp;</p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in">&nbsp;</p>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in"><span style=3D"font-size:=
11.0pt; font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;; color:#1F49=
7D">Thanks,</span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in"><span style=3D"font-size:=
11.0pt; font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;; color:#1F49=
7D">Shlomo</span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in"><span style=3D"font-size:=
11.0pt; font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;; color:#1F49=
7D">&nbsp;</span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in"><span style=3D"font-size:=
11.0pt; font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;; color:#1F49=
7D">Experience the all-new, singing and dancing interactive
<a href=3D"http://www.exlibrispublications.com/primo/">Primo brochure</a> <=
/span></p>
</div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in"><span style=3D"font-size:=
11.0pt; font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;; color:#1F49=
7D">&nbsp;</span></p>
<div>
<div style=3D"border:none; border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt; padding:3.0pt 0i=
n 0in 0in">
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in"><b><span style=3D"font-si=
ze:10.0pt; font-family:&quot;Tahoma&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;">From:</sp=
an></b><span style=3D"font-size:10.0pt; font-family:&quot;Tahoma&quot;,&quo=
t;sans-serif&quot;"> Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum [<=
a href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">mailto:[log in to unmask]
V</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Ross Singer<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, March 13, 2013 15:56<br>
<b>To:</b> <a href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]
OC.GOV</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [BIBFRAME] Reuse (or not) of existing ontologies</span>=
</p>
</div>
</div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in">&nbsp;</p>
<div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in">On Mar 13, 2013, at 9:36 =
AM, Shlomo Sanders &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">=
[log in to unmask]</a>&gt; wrote:</p>
</div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:12.0pt; mar=
gin-left:.5in">
&nbsp;</p>
<div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in">How can linking to RDF ac=
tually work in real life if each group has their on vocabulary?</p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in">&nbsp;</p>
</div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:12.0pt; mar=
gin-left:.5in">
Well, you align the vocabularies through RDFS, OWL, or something similar.</=
p>
<div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in">&nbsp;</p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in">Good RDF In and display i=
n browser, sure that will work.</p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in">But programmatic use of t=
he data when there is no standard (or even close to a standard) vocabulary?=
</p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in">&nbsp;</p>
</div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in">Well, this is exactly why=
 one would propose RDF, simply because you *can* explicitly align the vocab=
ularies. &nbsp;The downside is that it would require a fair amount of infer=
ence/reasoning to work, which is currently
 fairly unrealistic (not impossible, just unrealistic for widespread adopti=
on) which I don't expect to change any time in the near future.</p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in">&nbsp;</p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in">-Ross.</p>
</div>
<div>
<blockquote style=3D"margin-top:5.0pt; margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in">&nbsp;</p>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in">Thanks,</p>
</div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in">Shlomo </p>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in">&nbsp;</p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in">Sent from my iPad</p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:12.0pt; mar=
gin-left:.5in">
<br>
On Mar 13, 2013, at 15:00, &quot;Ross Singer&quot; &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:ro=
[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]</a>&gt; wrote:</p>
</div>
<blockquote style=3D"margin-top:5.0pt; margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in">Owen, I can't speak for B=
ibframe directly, but in the case, say, of RDA, the argument against using =
existing vocabularies vs. rolling your own and aligning them is that you ca=
n't control the fate of vocabularies
 you don't own. &nbsp;So if something happens to them (properties get depre=
cated/replaced, domain registrations lapse, etc.), you still have control o=
f the predicates/classes you are using and can realign them as necessary.
</p>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in">&nbsp;</p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in">Not saying that I necessa=
rily subscribe to that philosophy (although I see its merits), but I think =
that is probably the argument.</p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in">&nbsp;</p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in">-Ross.</p>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in">&nbsp;</p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in">On Mar 13, 2013, at 5:39 =
AM, Owen Stephens &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]
COM</a>&gt; wrote:</p>
</div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:12.0pt; mar=
gin-left:.5in">
&nbsp;</p>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in">Thanks for this J=F6rg </=
p>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in">&nbsp;</p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in">While obviously plans to =
align bibframe elements to other RDF ontologies would be welcome, I'd be ve=
ry interested to understand that arguments against simply adopting existing=
 vocabularies where they exist?</p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in">&nbsp;</p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in">Owen</p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in">&nbsp;</p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in"><span style=3D"font-size:=
13.5pt; font-family:&quot;Helvetica&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;">Owen Step=
hens</span></p>
</div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in"><span style=3D"font-size:=
13.5pt; font-family:&quot;Helvetica&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;">Owen Step=
hens Consulting</span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in"><span style=3D"font-size:=
13.5pt; font-family:&quot;Helvetica&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;">Web:
<a href=3D"http://www.ostephens.com/">http://www.ostephens.com</a><br>
Email: <a href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]</a><br>
Telephone: 0121 288 6936</span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in">&nbsp;</p>
<div>
<div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in">On 12 Mar 2013, at 09:23,=
 J=F6rg Prante &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">joergprante@GMA=
IL.COM</a>&gt; wrote:</p>
</div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:12.0pt; mar=
gin-left:.5in">
&nbsp;</p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in">From my understanding, th=
ere will be a process of &quot;alignment&quot; of Bibframe elements to othe=
r RDF elements. In the current phase of early Bibframe developement, I assu=
me the focus is still on creating native Bibframe
 elements and vocabulary.<br>
<br>
There have been some work closely related to Bibframe<br>
<br>
- the W3C provenance incubator group charter <a href=3D"http://www.w3.org/2=
005/Incubator/prov/charter">
http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/prov/charter</a><br>
- ONIX for Marc21 and for RDA (ONIX in RDF still ongoing work?) <a href=3D"=
http://www.editeur.org/96/ONIX-and-MARC21">
http://www.editeur.org/96/ONIX-and-MARC21</a><br>
- METS-PREMISE in RDF <a href=3D"http://www.loc.gov/standards/premis/pif-pr=
esentations-2012/PREMIS-OWL-iPRES2012.pdf">
http://www.loc.gov/standards/premis/pif-presentations-2012/PREMIS-OWL-iPRES=
2012.pdf</a><br>
- EAD to Europeana Data Model RDF <a href=3D"http://pro.europeana.eu/docume=
nts/900548/559c18d6-e5f3-410a-9e3e-7ee74f87c302">
http://pro.europeana.eu/documents/900548/559c18d6-e5f3-410a-9e3e-7ee74f87c3=
02</a><br>
- ...<br>
<br>
The results would be very interesting to see them aligned to Bibframe eleme=
nts.<br>
<br>
A wider perspective would be aligning the DataCite RDF <a href=3D"https://d=
ocs.google.com/document/d/1paJgvmCMu3pbM4in6PjWAKO0gP-6ultii3DWQslygq4/edit=
?authkey=3DCMeV3tgF&amp;hl=3Den_GB">
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1paJgvmCMu3pbM4in6PjWAKO0gP-6ultii3DWQsl=
ygq4/edit?authkey=3DCMeV3tgF&amp;hl=3Den_GB</a> to Bibframe. This would exc=
eed the traditional MARC scope and would reveal the power of RDF by integra=
ting research data environments seamlessly
 with Bibframe'd library catalog metadata.<br>
<br>
Also expanding the view to publisher activities is helpful to get some impr=
essions for what could be done if there was Bibframe-powered data. I saw
<a href=3D"http://prezi.com/yc35ccin0ipg/discovering-and-using-rdf-at-oreil=
ly-media/">
http://prezi.com/yc35ccin0ipg/discovering-and-using-rdf-at-oreilly-media/</=
a> for an experience of a publisher when traveling a market-driven path usi=
ng RDF on XML-based metadata.<br>
<br>
J=F6rg</p>
</div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in">&nbsp;</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in">&nbsp;</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal" style=3D"margin-left:.5in">&nbsp;</p>
</div>
<br>
<hr>
<font face=3D"Arial" color=3D"Gray" size=3D"1"><br>
This e-mail message (including any attachments) is for the sole use of<br>
the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged<br>
information. If the reader of this message is not the intended<br>
recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution<br>
or copying of this message (including any attachments) is strictly<br>
prohibited.<br>
<br>
If you have received this message in error, please contact<br>
the sender by reply e-mail message and destroy all copies of the<br>
original message (including attachments).<br>
</font>
</body>
</html>

--_000_AFA735FA6EE5C24A8C68FCF33E33040064504CE2e14mbx21wEnterp_--

------------------------------

Date:    Wed, 13 Mar 2013 12:26:28 -0400
From:    Tom Emerson <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Reuse (or not) of existing ontologies

Michael Hopwood writes:
> 1) Your own vocabulary (even if it is substantially made up of re-used
>    terms, it still has its own identity)
>
> 2) Mappings to others' vocabularies

At which point I don't feel like the community is any better off than we
are now, where each major library has its own tweaks to MARC that
consumers need to deal with. We're trading one thing for another. This
is especially true once you start account for international records.

    -tree

-- 
Tom Emerson
Principal Software Engineer, Search
EBSCO Publishing
[log in to unmask]

------------------------------

Date:    Wed, 13 Mar 2013 17:26:34 +0000
From:    Michael Hopwood <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Reuse (or not) of existing ontologies

--_000_F61A8945B05715448AF2221FB6080925076AB4252AEX27MAIL03msg_
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Laura,

>>> Meanwhile, where is that shared pool of RDF vocabulary mappings?

It's here: http://www.doi.org/VMF/documents.html

...but note the caveats: http://www.doi.org/VMF/license.html

...and the impressive list of people and organisations needed to maintain i=
t: http://www.doi.org/VMF/management.html ...

Michael

--_000_F61A8945B05715448AF2221FB6080925076AB4252AEX27MAIL03msg_
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<html xmlns:v=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o=3D"urn:schemas-micr=
osoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" =
xmlns:m=3D"http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns=3D"http:=
//www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=
=3D"text/html; charset=3Dus-ascii"><meta name=3DGenerator content=3D"Micros=
oft Word 14 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
	{font-family:Calibri;
	panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
	{font-family:Tahoma;
	panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
	{margin:0cm;
	margin-bottom:.0001pt;
	font-size:12.0pt;
	font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
	{mso-style-priority:99;
	color:blue;
	text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
	{mso-style-priority:99;
	color:purple;
	text-decoration:underline;}
code
	{mso-style-priority:99;
	font-family:"Courier New";}
p.MsoAcetate, li.MsoAcetate, div.MsoAcetate
	{mso-style-priority:99;
	mso-style-link:"Balloon Text Char";
	margin:0cm;
	margin-bottom:.0001pt;
	font-size:8.0pt;
	font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
p.msochpdefault, li.msochpdefault, div.msochpdefault
	{mso-style-name:msochpdefault;
	mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
	margin-right:0cm;
	mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
	margin-left:0cm;
	font-size:10.0pt;
	font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
span.emailstyle19
	{mso-style-name:emailstyle19;
	font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
	color:#1F497D;}
span.emailstyle21
	{mso-style-name:emailstyle21;
	color:black;}
span.EmailStyle210
	{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
	font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
	color:#1F497D;}
span.BalloonTextChar
	{mso-style-name:"Balloon Text Char";
	mso-style-priority:99;
	mso-style-link:"Balloon Text";
	font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
.MsoChpDefault
	{mso-style-type:export-only;
	font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
	{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
	margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
	{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext=3D"edit" spidmax=3D"1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext=3D"edit">
<o:idmap v:ext=3D"edit" data=3D"1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=3DEN-GB link=3Dblue vli=
nk=3Dpurple><div class=3DWordSection1><p class=3DMsoNormal><span style=3D'f=
ont-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Laura,<o:=
p></o:p></span></p><p class=3DMsoNormal><span style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;fon=
t-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>=
<p class=3DMsoNormal><span style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",=
"sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>&gt;&gt;&gt; Meanwhile, where is that shared po=
ol of RDF vocabulary mappings?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=3DMsoNormal><s=
pan style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F4=
97D'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p><p class=3DMsoNormal><span style=3D'font-s=
ize:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>It&#8217;s her=
e: <a href=3D"http://www.doi.org/VMF/documents.html">http://www.doi.org/VMF=
/documents.html</a> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=3DMsoNormal><span style=
=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p=
>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p><p class=3DMsoNormal><span lang=3DEN-US style=3D'co=
lor:#1F497D'>&#8230;but note the caveats: <a href=3D"http://www.doi.org/VMF=
/license.html">http://www.doi.org/VMF/license.html</a><o:p></o:p></span></p=
><p class=3DMsoNormal><span lang=3DEN-US style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-fam=
ily:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p><p cl=
ass=3DMsoNormal><span lang=3DEN-US style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"C=
alibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>&#8230;and the impressive list of peopl=
e and organisations needed to maintain it: <a href=3D"http://www.doi.org/VM=
F/management.html">http://www.doi.org/VMF/management.html</a> ...<o:p></o:p=
></span></p><p class=3DMsoNormal><span lang=3DEN-US style=3D'font-size:11.0=
pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></spa=
n></p><p class=3DMsoNormal><span lang=3DEN-US style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;fon=
t-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Michael<o:p></o:p></span></p=
></div></body></html>=

--_000_F61A8945B05715448AF2221FB6080925076AB4252AEX27MAIL03msg_--

------------------------------

Date:    Wed, 13 Mar 2013 13:47:29 -0400
From:    Diane Hillmann <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Reuse (or not) of existing ontologies

--047d7b344142f86ec804d7d1ff33
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Folks:

There has been much progress made in developing mapping strategies--you
might want to look at some of Gordon Dunsire's presentations, for instance:

http://www.slideshare.net/GordonDunsire/mapping-to-dc

He has a couple more presentations on Slideshare and others on his website:
http://gordondunsire.com/presentations.htm

Diane


On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 1:26 PM, Michael Hopwood <[log in to unmask]>wrote=
:

> Laura,****
>
> ** **
>
> >>> Meanwhile, where is that shared pool of RDF vocabulary mappings?****
>
> ** **
>
> It=92s here: http://www.doi.org/VMF/documents.html ****
>
> ** **
>
> =85but note the caveats: http://www.doi.org/VMF/license.html****
>
> ** **
>
> =85and the impressive list of people and organisations needed to maintain
> it: http://www.doi.org/VMF/management.html ...****
>
> ** **
>
> Michael****
>

--047d7b344142f86ec804d7d1ff33
Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Folks:<div><br></div><div>There has been much progress made in developing m=
apping strategies--you might want to look at some of Gordon Dunsire&#39;s p=
resentations, for instance:</div><div><br></div><div><a href=3D"http://www.=
slideshare.net/GordonDunsire/mapping-to-dc">http://www.slideshare.net/Gordo=
nDunsire/mapping-to-dc</a></div>
<div><br></div><div>He has a couple more presentations on Slideshare and ot=
hers on his website:=A0<a href=3D"http://gordondunsire.com/presentations.ht=
m">http://gordondunsire.com/presentations.htm</a></div><div><br></div><div>
Diane</div><div><br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at =
1:26 PM, Michael Hopwood <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:michael@ed=
iteur.org" target=3D"_blank">[log in to unmask]</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><=
blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px=
 #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div lang=3D"EN-GB" link=3D"blue" vlink=3D"purple"><div><p class=3D"MsoNorm=
al"><span style=3D"font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;s=
ans-serif&quot;;color:#1f497d">Laura,<u></u><u></u></span></p><div class=3D=
"im"><p class=3D"MsoNormal">
<span style=3D"font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-=
serif&quot;;color:#1f497d"><u></u>=A0<u></u></span></p><p class=3D"MsoNorma=
l"><span style=3D"font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sa=
ns-serif&quot;;color:#1f497d">&gt;&gt;&gt; Meanwhile, where is that shared =
pool of RDF vocabulary mappings?<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Ca=
libri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1f497d"><u></u>=A0<u></u></span><=
/p></div><p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"font-size:11.0pt;font-family=
:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1f497d">It=92s here: <a =
href=3D"http://www.doi.org/VMF/documents.html" target=3D"_blank">http://www=
.doi.org/VMF/documents.html</a> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span style=3D"font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Ca=
libri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1f497d"><u></u>=A0<u></u></span><=
/p><p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US" style=3D"color:#1f497d">=85b=
ut note the caveats: <a href=3D"http://www.doi.org/VMF/license.html" target=
=3D"_blank">http://www.doi.org/VMF/license.html</a><u></u><u></u></span></p=
>
<p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US" style=3D"font-size:11.0pt;font-=
family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1f497d"><u></u>=A0=
<u></u></span></p><p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span lang=3D"EN-US" style=3D"font=
-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#=
1f497d">=85and the impressive list of people and organisations needed to ma=
intain it: <a href=3D"http://www.doi.org/VMF/management.html" target=3D"_bl=
ank">http://www.doi.org/VMF/management.html</a> ...<span class=3D"HOEnZb"><=
font color=3D"#888888"><u></u><u></u></font></span></span></p>
<span class=3D"HOEnZb"><font color=3D"#888888"><p class=3D"MsoNormal"><span=
 lang=3D"EN-US" style=3D"font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&=
quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1f497d"><u></u>=A0<u></u></span></p><p class=
=3D"MsoNormal">
<span lang=3D"EN-US" style=3D"font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&qu=
ot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1f497d">Michael<u></u><u></u></span></p><=
/font></span></div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>

--047d7b344142f86ec804d7d1ff33--

------------------------------

Date:    Wed, 13 Mar 2013 10:25:06 -0800
From:    "J. McRee Elrod" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Reuse (or not) of existing ontologies

Ross Singer said:

>I can't speak for Bibframe directly, but in the case, say, of RDA,
>the argument against using existing vocabularies vs. rolling your own
>and aligning them is that you can't control the fate of vocabularies
>you don't own.
 
ISBD is an international library standard over which Anglo librarians
have increasing influence.  

ISBD element names should have been used by Bibframe.

This is just as true for RDA as for Bibframe.  A Canadian was chair of
the Working Group which created Area 0.  I see *no* excuse for RDA not
adopting the excellent ISBD Area 0 content and media terms.

Not only is "electronic" superior to "computer" (who thinks of their
Kobo or Kindle as a computer?), but "image (moving)" and  cartographic
treatment are far better for display than the over long RDA phrases.  
Those well wrought terms have been around since 2009.

Too many wheels which don't roll well have been reinvented.


   __       __   J. McRee (Mac) Elrod ([log in to unmask])
  {__  |   /     Special Libraries Cataloguing   HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
  ___} |__ \__________________________________________________________

------------------------------

Date:    Wed, 13 Mar 2013 11:00:39 -0700
From:    Karen Coyle <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Reuse (or not) of existing ontologies

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------080709030206040807070809
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Michael, I beg to differ. VMF (which does not seem to be currently 
active) is a mapping between a set of vocabularies, but is NOT related 
to RDF vocabularies, as far as I can see. It uses terms, not identifiers.

It is also the opposite of open data. It is owned by the DOI foundation 
and you have to pay to have your terms added:

  * Fees for the registration and mapping service are as follows:

  * £40 for each Term to be registered/mapped within a Vocabulary
    comprising less then ten Terms
  * £30 for each Term to be registered/mapped within a Vocabulary
    comprising between 10 and 100 Terms
  * £20 for each Term to be registered/mapped within a Vocabulary
    comprising more than 100 Terms

To answer an earlier question about most used terms, the Linked Open 
Vocabularies project has a statistics page:

http://lov.okfn.org/dataset/lov/stats/

You can sort by popularity in LOD space. You can also sort by popularity 
in LOV space, which is how many ontologies include that term.

kc


On 3/13/13 10:26 AM, Michael Hopwood wrote:
>
> Laura,
>
> >>> Meanwhile, where is that shared pool of RDF vocabulary mappings?
>
> It's here: http://www.doi.org/VMF/documents.html
>
> ...but note the caveats: http://www.doi.org/VMF/license.html
>
> ...and the impressive list of people and organisations needed to 
> maintain it: http://www.doi.org/VMF/management.html ...
>
> Michael
>

-- 
Karen Coyle
[log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net
ph: 1-510-540-7596
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet


--------------080709030206040807070809
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<html>
  <head>
    <meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
      http-equiv="Content-Type">
  </head>
  <body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
    Michael, I beg to differ. VMF (which does not seem to be currently
    active) is a mapping between a set of vocabularies, but is NOT
    related to RDF vocabularies, as far as I can see. It uses terms, not
    identifiers. <br>
    <br>
    It is also the opposite of open data. It is owned by the DOI
    foundation and you have to pay to have your terms added:<br>
    <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;
      charset=ISO-8859-1">
    <ul>
      <li>Fees for the registration and mapping service are as follows:
      </li>
    </ul>
    <div style="padding-left: 2em;">
      <ul>
        <li>&pound;40 for each Term to be registered/mapped within a
          Vocabulary comprising less then ten Terms </li>
        <li>&pound;30 for each Term to be registered/mapped within a
          Vocabulary comprising between 10 and 100 Terms</li>
        <li>&pound;20 for each Term to be registered/mapped within a
          Vocabulary comprising more than 100 Terms </li>
      </ul>
    </div>
    To answer an earlier question about most used terms, the Linked Open
    Vocabularies project has a statistics page:<br>
    <br>
    <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lov.okfn.org/dataset/lov/stats/">http://lov.okfn.org/dataset/lov/stats/</a><br>
    <br>
    You can sort by popularity in LOD space. You can also sort by
    popularity in LOV space, which is how many ontologies include that
    term.<br>
    <br>
    kc<br>
    <br>
    <br>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 3/13/13 10:26 AM, Michael Hopwood
      wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:[log in to unmask]"
      type="cite">
      <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
        charset=ISO-8859-1">
      <meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered
        medium)">
      <style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
	{font-family:Calibri;
	panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
	{font-family:Tahoma;
	panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
	{margin:0cm;
	margin-bottom:.0001pt;
	font-size:12.0pt;
	font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
	{mso-style-priority:99;
	color:blue;
	text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
	{mso-style-priority:99;
	color:purple;
	text-decoration:underline;}
code
	{mso-style-priority:99;
	font-family:"Courier New";}
p.MsoAcetate, li.MsoAcetate, div.MsoAcetate
	{mso-style-priority:99;
	mso-style-link:"Balloon Text Char";
	margin:0cm;
	margin-bottom:.0001pt;
	font-size:8.0pt;
	font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
p.msochpdefault, li.msochpdefault, div.msochpdefault
	{mso-style-name:msochpdefault;
	mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
	margin-right:0cm;
	mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
	margin-left:0cm;
	font-size:10.0pt;
	font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
span.emailstyle19
	{mso-style-name:emailstyle19;
	font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
	color:#1F497D;}
span.emailstyle21
	{mso-style-name:emailstyle21;
	color:black;}
span.EmailStyle210
	{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
	font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
	color:#1F497D;}
span.BalloonTextChar
	{mso-style-name:"Balloon Text Char";
	mso-style-priority:99;
	mso-style-link:"Balloon Text";
	font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
.MsoChpDefault
	{mso-style-type:export-only;
	font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
	{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
	margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
	{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
      <div class="WordSection1">
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1F497D">Laura,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1F497D"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1F497D">&gt;&gt;&gt;
            Meanwhile, where is that shared pool of RDF vocabulary
            mappings?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1F497D"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1F497D">It&#8217;s
            here: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
              href="http://www.doi.org/VMF/documents.html">http://www.doi.org/VMF/documents.html</a>
            <o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1F497D"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1F497D" lang="EN-US">&#8230;but
            note the caveats: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
              href="http://www.doi.org/VMF/license.html">http://www.doi.org/VMF/license.html</a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1F497D"
            lang="EN-US"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1F497D"
            lang="EN-US">&#8230;and the impressive list of people and
            organisations needed to maintain it: <a
              moz-do-not-send="true"
              href="http://www.doi.org/VMF/management.html">http://www.doi.org/VMF/management.html</a>
            ...<o:p></o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1F497D"
            lang="EN-US"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>
        <p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1F497D"
            lang="EN-US">Michael<o:p></o:p></span></p>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
    <pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">-- 
Karen Coyle
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]</a> <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://kcoyle.net">http://kcoyle.net</a>
ph: 1-510-540-7596
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet</pre>
  </body>
</html>

--------------080709030206040807070809--

------------------------------

Date:    Wed, 13 Mar 2013 11:13:30 -0700
From:    Karen Coyle <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Reuse (or not) of existing ontologies

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------040205090707090604060102
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Diane, I think we know the strategy. What we lack is working technology. 
And by that I mean technology that scales in the real world.

kc

On 3/13/13 10:47 AM, Diane Hillmann wrote:
> Folks:
>
> There has been much progress made in developing mapping 
> strategies--you might want to look at some of Gordon Dunsire's 
> presentations, for instance:
>
> http://www.slideshare.net/GordonDunsire/mapping-to-dc
>
> He has a couple more presentations on Slideshare and others on his 
> website: http://gordondunsire.com/presentations.htm
>
> Diane
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 1:26 PM, Michael Hopwood <[log in to unmask] 
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>
>     Laura,
>
>     >>> Meanwhile, where is that shared pool of RDF vocabulary mappings?
>
>     It’s here: http://www.doi.org/VMF/documents.html
>
>     …but note the caveats: http://www.doi.org/VMF/license.html
>
>     …and the impressive list of people and organisations needed to
>     maintain it: http://www.doi.org/VMF/management.html ...
>
>     Michael
>
>

-- 
Karen Coyle
[log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net
ph: 1-510-540-7596
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet


--------------040205090707090604060102
Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

<html>
  <head>
    <meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
      http-equiv="Content-Type">
  </head>
  <body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
    Diane, I think we know the strategy. What we lack is working
    technology. And by that I mean technology that scales in the real
    world.<br>
    <br>
    kc<br>
    <br>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 3/13/13 10:47 AM, Diane Hillmann
      wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:[log in to unmask]"
      type="cite">Folks:
      <div><br>
      </div>
      <div>There has been much progress made in developing mapping
        strategies--you might want to look at some of Gordon Dunsire's
        presentations, for instance:</div>
      <div><br>
      </div>
      <div><a moz-do-not-send="true"
          href="http://www.slideshare.net/GordonDunsire/mapping-to-dc">http://www.slideshare.net/GordonDunsire/mapping-to-dc</a></div>
      <div><br>
      </div>
      <div>He has a couple more presentations on Slideshare and others
        on his website: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
          href="http://gordondunsire.com/presentations.htm">http://gordondunsire.com/presentations.htm</a></div>
      <div><br>
      </div>
      <div>
        Diane</div>
      <div><br>
        <br>
        <div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 1:26 PM,
          Michael Hopwood <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a moz-do-not-send="true"
              href="mailto:[log in to unmask]" target="_blank">[log in to unmask]</a>&gt;</span>
          wrote:<br>
          <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
            .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
            <div link="blue" vlink="purple" lang="EN-GB">
              <div>
                <p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1f497d">Laura,</span></p>
                <div class="im">
                  <p class="MsoNormal">
                    <span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1f497d"> </span></p>
                  <p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1f497d">&gt;&gt;&gt;
                      Meanwhile, where is that shared pool of RDF
                      vocabulary mappings?</span></p>
                  <p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1f497d"> </span></p>
                </div>
                <p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1f497d">It’s
                    here: <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                      href="http://www.doi.org/VMF/documents.html"
                      target="_blank">http://www.doi.org/VMF/documents.html</a>
                  </span></p>
                <p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1f497d"> </span></p>
                <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:#1f497d"
                    lang="EN-US">…but note the caveats: <a
                      moz-do-not-send="true"
                      href="http://www.doi.org/VMF/license.html"
                      target="_blank">http://www.doi.org/VMF/license.html</a></span></p>
                <p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1f497d"
                    lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
                <p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1f497d"
                    lang="EN-US">…and the impressive list of people and
                    organisations needed to maintain it: <a
                      moz-do-not-send="true"
                      href="http://www.doi.org/VMF/management.html"
                      target="_blank">http://www.doi.org/VMF/management.html</a>
                    ...<span class="HOEnZb"></span></span></p>
                <span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888">
                    <p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1f497d"
                        lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
                    <p class="MsoNormal">
                      <span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1f497d"
                        lang="EN-US">Michael</span></p>
                  </font></span></div>
            </div>
          </blockquote>
        </div>
        <br>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
    <pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">-- 
Karen Coyle
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]</a> <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://kcoyle.net">http://kcoyle.net</a>
ph: 1-510-540-7596
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet</pre>
  </body>
</html>

--------------040205090707090604060102--

------------------------------

Date:    Wed, 13 Mar 2013 17:13:00 -0400
From:    Eric Miller <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Reuse (or not) of existing ontologies

On Mar 11, 2013, at 5:04 PM, Owen Stephens <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> I don't think there has been any discussion on the list about this yet =
(sorry if I've missed it)

If you missed it, that makes two of us. But your question relates to an =
important design decision so thanks for bringing this up.  To back up a =
bit (and ensure shared context) the following is a bit dated, but I =
think still quite useful:

[[
The BIBFRAME Vocabulary

The BIBFRAME model is defined in RDF.
=20
The RDF vocabulary for the draft BIBFRAME model, to be available =
shortly, will provide a convenient way of navigating around the RDF =
model.

The suggested namespace for the BIBFRAME model is =
http://loc.gov/bibframe/vocab. An RDF/XML serialization of this =
vocabulary is expected to be available at this location. While the =
recommendation of a singular namespace is counter to several current =
Linked Data bibliographic efforts, it is crucial to clarify =
responsibility and authority behind the schematic framework of BIBFRAME =
in order to minimize confusion and reduce the complexity of the =
resulting data formats. It will be the role of the Library=92s standards =
stakeholders to maintain the connections between BIBFRAME model elements =
and source vocabularies such as Dublin Core, FOAF, SKOS and future, =
related vocabularies that may be developed to support different aspects =
of the Library workflow.

Identifier persistence is not a technology issue but rather an =
organizational, policy, and community one. A persistence policy should =
be defined stating clearly the persistence and change management =
mechanisms.
]]
-- http://www.loc.gov/marc/transition/pdf/marcld-report-11-21-2012.pdf

But certainly more background and detailed discussion is warranted. =
Quickly scanning the growing thread around this topic, it seems that =
many think so as well ;)

> Much of the practical work in the area of linked data and libraries =
has made use of common existing vocabularies to publish data. This =
commonly includes:
>=20
> DC/DC Terms
> FOAF
> Bibliographic Ontology (aka Bibo)

And thats just a start!

> I think I've seen these in every implementation of linked data =
representations of library materials. They are often used alongside =
other existing vocabularies (Bio, frbr, isbd) and often a specifically =
created vocabulary to deal with elements that fall outside these =
existing vocabs (e.g. the BNB uses =
http://www.bl.uk/schemas/bibliographic/blterms#, Libris uses =
http://libris.kb.se/vocabulary/experimental#)

Our initial linked data analysis identified literally dozens of =
namespaces used in the Library community reflecting various stages of =
experimentation. More if you start to broaden analysis to the include =
museums, archives, galleries, etc.. And even more if you broaden into =
more of how we might imagine patrons / others adding value to this data. =
 This shouldn't be a surprise to anyone familiar with RDF / Linked Data. =
There isn't one vocabulary that works (or will work) for everything. ;)

> In light of this it seems notable that so far Bibframe doesn't specify =
the use of any vocabularies outside bibframe specific elements, and =
there is no information on how the bibframe elements might map to =
existing vocabularies.

Good point.  Eventually we do intend to work on non-normative transform =
and mappings from and too other vocabularies, which allows pragmatic =
reuse.  And over time, with usage experience some of those mappings =
might take on normative force.  But certainly this is underspecified and =
more work in this area is required.=20

> So I guess my first question is - shouldn't Bibframe reuse existing =
vocabularies where possible? If there are arguments against this - what =
are they?


There are many benefits of vocabulary reuse, but as with many things, =
there are costs as well that need to be carefully considered.  As Ross =
points out, you can't control the fate of vocabularies you don't own. =
Designing systems that leverage multiple vocabularies managed by various =
stakeholders is a tricky issue and one that requires careful =
considerations. There are many reasons why namespaces / vocabulary =
"drift" over time (404 being a worse case example) and all of these may =
have an affect on systems. Business acquisitions (anyone recall =
http://my.netscape.com/rdf/* ?), economic factors, organizational =
changes, changing social interests, etc. are just a handful of reasons =
for causing such change, but thinking ahead to infrastructure to support =
the next 40+ years of Libraries, namespace persistence is a key point to =
consider when dealing with how best to integrate and invest in =
vocabulary terms outside of ones community.

We accept a level of risk by basing BIBFRAME on open, royalty free W3 =
standards because we have confidence in a shared (Web) community's =
investment in these underpinning vocabularies. Basing BIBFRAME on RDF =
(and the Web) allows us to more easily weave in additional vocabularies =
as new requirements, customization and localization demand while still =
achieving resilience in systems. While BIBFRAME is being built on a =
framework that supports mix-matching of terms, its taking an =
appropriately critical view regarding minting new terms vs adopting =
external ones. Making formal connections between BIBFRAME model terms =
and other vocabularies terms errs on the side of caution when striking a =
balance between the stability of BIBFRAME (and an existing community in =
which it serves) and a web of relationships with other communities.  And =
while I expect this will lead to some duplication of terms, as Karen =
pointed out, Library terms are generally more precise than other =
(intentionally broader) community terms.  So, while I expect Library=92s =
standards stakeholders to maintain the connections between BIBFRAME =
model elements and other relevant vocabulary terms, I expect many of =
these relationships to be "is Refinement Of" ones. ;)

At this point, i'd be remiss in not mentioning the vocabulary is in =
development, draft, subject to change, etc.

In the meantime, my hope is though this effort we will also collectively =
advance the discussion of namespace persistence to help ensure weather =
we map to terms (or mix / match these in various community profiles) the =
terms in question will continue to exist though out the course of =
BIBFRAME. There are many examples of stated persistence policies for =
vocabularies [0][1][2][3].  But I think far more could be done (a simple =
set of machine readable 'living will' templates might be an example of =
such a step [4]) to help ensure social and organizational backups.=20

Again, identifier persistence is not a technology issue but rather an =
organizational, policy, and community one. A value in BIBFRAME =
namespace(s) will be proportionate to the community that invests in them =
as well as the organization commitment to these namespaces and terms.=20

--
Eric Miller
President, Zepheira "The Art of Data"
http://zepheira.com/ tel:+1.617.395.0229


[0] W3C URI Persistence Policy
- http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Persistence.html

[1] Namespace Policy for the Dublin Core Metadata Initiative (DCMI)
- http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-namespace/

[2] DCMI Generic Namespace Policy for RDF Vocabularies
- http://dublincore.org/documents/2011/05/02/dcmi-namespace-generic/

[3] Agreement between DCMI and the FOAF Project
- http://dublincore.org/documents/dcmi-foaf/

[4] I think a simple set of machine readable templates may serve as a =
very useful means for defining a "living will" for namespaces. Something =
akin to CC templates that contains...

1) The owner
2) The namespace URI(s)
3) A policy concerning classes of changes that are allowed
4) Designator on institution committed to taking over namespace in the =
event a current party is (for whatever reason) no longer able to do so.

might be a useful step in formalizing various informal policies that =
would aid in stakeholder discussions.

------------------------------

Date:    Wed, 13 Mar 2013 17:18:33 -0400
From:    Simon Spero <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Reuse (or not) of existing ontologies

--20cf300fb05dd36dca04d7d4f2cd
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 11:55 AM, Karen Coyle <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>
> RDA:parallelTitle -> subclassOf ->RDA:titleProper-> subclassOf
> ->dcterms:title [1]
>
> I'm still waiting to see a solution that implements this, and implements
> it simply and efficiently.
>
[1] In particular because you can also have:
> foaf:name -> subclassOf -> dcterms:title
> since the definition of dcterms:title is " A name given to the resource."
> and anything -- documents, towns, people, chairs -- can be a resource.


I think you mean sub property, not sub class...

This kind of simple entailment is trivially handled at scale, either at
load time, or at run time- this is not new technology.

Well known techniques can be used in conjunction with pre-computation over
the class or property hierarchy, to reduce this kind of transitive
computation to checking to see if an integer falls within one or more
ranges.

Simon

--20cf300fb05dd36dca04d7d4f2cd
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 11:55 AM, Karen Coyle <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=
=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]" target=3D"_blank">[log in to unmask]</a>&gt;</sp=
an> wrote:<br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" =
style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">

 =20
   =20
 =20
  <div text=3D"#000000" bgcolor=3D"#FFFFFF"><br>
    RDA:parallelTitle -&gt; subclassOf -&gt;RDA:titleProper-&gt;
    subclassOf -&gt;dcterms:title [1]<br>
    <br>
    I&#39;m still waiting to see a solution that implements this, and
    implements it simply and efficiently.=A0<br></div></blockquote><blockqu=
ote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-wid=
th:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-l=
eft:1ex">
<span style=3D"color:rgb(34,34,34);font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:1=
2.800000190734863px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">[1] In particular be=
cause you can also have:</span><br style=3D"color:rgb(34,34,34);font-family=
:arial,sans-serif;font-size:12.800000190734863px;background-color:rgb(255,2=
55,255)">
<span style=3D"color:rgb(34,34,34);font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:1=
2.800000190734863px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">foaf:name -&gt; subc=
lassOf -&gt; dcterms:title</span><br style=3D"color:rgb(34,34,34);font-fami=
ly:arial,sans-serif;font-size:12.800000190734863px;background-color:rgb(255=
,255,255)">
<span style=3D"color:rgb(34,34,34);font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:1=
2.800000190734863px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">since the definition=
 of dcterms:title is &quot; A name given to the resource.&quot; and anythin=
g -- documents, towns, people, chairs -- can be a resource.</span></blockqu=
ote>
<div>=A0</div><div>I think you mean sub property, not sub class...</div><di=
v><br></div><div>This kind of simple entailment is trivially handled at sca=
le, either at load time, or at run time- this is not new technology. =A0</d=
iv>
<div><br></div><div>Well known techniques can be used in conjunction with p=
re-computation over the class or property hierarchy, to reduce this kind of=
 transitive computation to checking to see if an integer falls within one o=
r more ranges.=A0</div>
<div><br></div><div>Simon=A0</div><div><br></div><div>=A0</div></div>

--20cf300fb05dd36dca04d7d4f2cd--

------------------------------

Date:    Wed, 13 Mar 2013 21:27:20 +0000
From:    "Wallis,Richard" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Reuse (or not) of existing ontologies

If the you/others referenced here are communities such as 'the library
community', 'the search engine community', 'the ecommerce community',
potentially 'the publisher community', etc., this stance makes some sense.

If it is trading localised marc profiles for localised BIBFRAME profiles,
you are right - we will be not much better off.

Even if you are talking about the former, data publishers must remain
aware of the potentially differing consumer communities they are
supporting.  In other words a library may well be publishing data using
the BIBFRAME vocabulary (for other libraries to consume) at the same time
as Schema.org (for the search engines to consume).

~Richard.




On 13/03/2013 12:26, "Tom Emerson" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>Michael Hopwood writes:
>> 1) Your own vocabulary (even if it is substantially made up of re-used
>>    terms, it still has its own identity)
>>
>> 2) Mappings to others' vocabularies
>
>At which point I don't feel like the community is any better off than we
>are now, where each major library has its own tweaks to MARC that
>consumers need to deal with. We're trading one thing for another. This
>is especially true once you start account for international records.
>
>    -tree
>
>--=20
>Tom Emerson
>Principal Software Engineer, Search
>EBSCO Publishing
>[log in to unmask]
>

------------------------------

Date:    Wed, 13 Mar 2013 21:59:40 -0400
From:    Ross Singer <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Reuse (or not) of existing ontologies

--Apple-Mail=_AB7C7F7C-5CD1-45F3-AD8F-5A690620E90D
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=iso-8859-1


On Mar 13, 2013, at 5:18 PM, Simon Spero <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 11:55 AM, Karen Coyle <[log in to unmask]> =
wrote:
>=20
> RDA:parallelTitle -> subclassOf ->RDA:titleProper-> subclassOf =
->dcterms:title [1]
>=20
> I'm still waiting to see a solution that implements this, and =
implements it simply and efficiently.=20
> [1] In particular because you can also have:
> foaf:name -> subclassOf -> dcterms:title
> since the definition of dcterms:title is " A name given to the =
resource." and anything -- documents, towns, people, chairs -- can be a =
resource.
> =20
> I think you mean sub property, not sub class...
>=20
> This kind of simple entailment is trivially handled at scale, either =
at load time, or at run time- this is not new technology. =20

Simon, I'm not saying it's novel, but it's also non-trivial, especially =
if you're talking in terms of SPARQL (rather than just RDF graphs in =
general).  There aren't many (any?) free triple stores that support =
inferencing/reasoning, at least not in any serious sense (Fuseki/TDB =
supports RDFS reasoning via riot, I think, but only if you ingest your =
triples with their inferred entailments, which massively increases your =
index size; 4-Store doesn't support reasoning at all, although there are =
3rd party projects that claim to provide it; OWLIM-Lite does, but it's =
quite limited in how much it can scale; Mulgara? No clue, but I don't =
think so; etc.) and Virtuoso, Allegrograph, Stardog, etc. aren't cheap.

And all this implies that a reasoning-aware triple store is *required* =
for this stuff, which is, in my mind, problematic.  Take, for example, =
id.loc.gov, which doesn't (or didn't, at any rate) use anything besides =
a regular RDBMS, since the domain it was modeling was known and finite, =
much like most applications are.

I think a good analogy here is Z39.50: think of how libraries have =
implemented this historically.  Basically, they've just deferred to =
their vendor's implementation on this because it's niche and they have =
(really) no idea how it works or even what an ideal implementation would =
look like.  The vendors, sensing the libraries' ambivalence and =
ignorance towards (and being just as ignorant and ambivalent =
themselves), do the absolute minimum necessary to "comply".

I can't imagine that a future where we replace "MARC store with Z39.50 =
interface" with "triple store with SPARQL endpoint" looking all that =
much different, honestly, and while I don't think we should let that =
hold us back, I also think it needs to be taken into consideration =
somewhat.

-Ross.

>=20
> Well known techniques can be used in conjunction with pre-computation =
over the class or property hierarchy, to reduce this kind of transitive =
computation to checking to see if an integer falls within one or more =
ranges.=20
>=20
> Simon=20
>=20
> =20


--Apple-Mail=_AB7C7F7C-5CD1-45F3-AD8F-5A690620E90D
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset=iso-8859-1

<html><head><meta http-equiv=3D"Content-Type" content=3D"text/html =
charset=3Diso-8859-1"></head><body style=3D"word-wrap: break-word; =
-webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; =
"><br><div><div>On Mar 13, 2013, at 5:18 PM, Simon Spero &lt;<a =
href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]</a>&gt; =
wrote:</div><br class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote =
type=3D"cite">On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 11:55 AM, Karen Coyle <span =
dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:[log in to unmask]" =
target=3D"_blank">[log in to unmask]</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><div =
class=3D"gmail_quote"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 =
0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">

 =20
   =20
 =20
  <div text=3D"#000000" bgcolor=3D"#FFFFFF"><br>
    RDA:parallelTitle -&gt; subclassOf -&gt;RDA:titleProper-&gt;
    subclassOf -&gt;dcterms:title [1]<br>
    <br>
    I'm still waiting to see a solution that implements this, and
    implements it simply and =
efficiently.&nbsp;<br></div></blockquote><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote"=
 style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px =
0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left=
-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<span =
style=3D"color:rgb(34,34,34);font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:12.800=
000190734863px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">[1] In particular =
because you can also have:</span><br =
style=3D"color:rgb(34,34,34);font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:12.800=
000190734863px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">
<span =
style=3D"color:rgb(34,34,34);font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:12.800=
000190734863px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">foaf:name -&gt; =
subclassOf -&gt; dcterms:title</span><br =
style=3D"color:rgb(34,34,34);font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:12.800=
000190734863px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">
<span =
style=3D"color:rgb(34,34,34);font-family:arial,sans-serif;font-size:12.800=
000190734863px;background-color:rgb(255,255,255)">since the definition =
of dcterms:title is " A name given to the resource." and anything -- =
documents, towns, people, chairs -- can be a =
resource.</span></blockquote>
<div>&nbsp;</div><div>I think you mean sub property, not sub =
class...</div><div><br></div><div>This kind of simple entailment is =
trivially handled at scale, either at load time, or at run time- this is =
not new technology. &nbsp;</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div>Simon, =
I'm not saying it's novel, but it's also non-trivial, especially if =
you're talking in terms of SPARQL (rather than just RDF graphs in =
general). &nbsp;There aren't many (any?) free triple stores that support =
inferencing/reasoning, at least not in any serious sense (Fuseki/TDB =
supports RDFS reasoning via riot, I think, but only if you ingest your =
triples with their inferred entailments, which massively increases your =
index size; 4-Store doesn't support reasoning at all, although there are =
3rd party projects that claim to provide it; OWLIM-Lite does, but it's =
quite limited in how much it can scale; Mulgara? No clue, but I don't =
think so; etc.) and Virtuoso, Allegrograph, Stardog, etc. aren't =
cheap.</div><div><br></div><div>And all this implies that a =
reasoning-aware triple store is *required* for this stuff, which is, in =
my mind, problematic. &nbsp;Take, for example, <a =
href=3D"http://id.loc.gov">id.loc.gov</a>, which doesn't (or didn't, at =
any rate) use anything besides a regular RDBMS, since the domain it was =
modeling was known and finite, much like most applications =
are.</div><div><br></div><div>I think a good analogy here is Z39.50: =
think of how libraries have implemented this historically. =
&nbsp;Basically, they've just deferred to their vendor's implementation =
on this because it's niche and they have (really) no idea how it works =
or even what an ideal implementation would look like. &nbsp;The vendors, =
sensing the libraries' ambivalence and ignorance towards (and being just =
as ignorant and ambivalent themselves), do the absolute minimum =
necessary to "comply".</div><div><br></div><div>I can't imagine that a =
future where we replace "MARC store with Z39.50 interface" with "triple =
store with SPARQL endpoint" looking all that much different, honestly, =
and while I don't think we should let that hold us back, I also think it =
needs to be taken into consideration =
somewhat.</div><div><br></div><div>-Ross.</div><div><br><blockquote =
type=3D"cite"><div class=3D"gmail_quote">
<div><br></div><div>Well known techniques can be used in conjunction =
with pre-computation over the class or property hierarchy, to reduce =
this kind of transitive computation to checking to see if an integer =
falls within one or more ranges.&nbsp;</div>
=
<div><br></div><div>Simon&nbsp;</div><div><br></div><div>&nbsp;</div></div=
>
</blockquote></div><br></body></html>=

--Apple-Mail=_AB7C7F7C-5CD1-45F3-AD8F-5A690620E90D--

------------------------------

Date:    Wed, 13 Mar 2013 22:08:32 -0400
From:    "Young,Jeff (OR)" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Reuse (or not) of existing ontologies

--Apple-Mail-0BAD4606-9370-4BF7-B6EE-281F989F0FF6
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I think that domain experts should tune out of this discussion because by th=
e time BIBFRAME is "real" (if it ever is) the tools will be capable of infer=
encing at scale. The fact that most data consumers don't know what inferenci=
ng is should factor out.

Jeff

Sent from my iPad

On Mar 13, 2013, at 10:01 PM, "Ross Singer" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>=20
> On Mar 13, 2013, at 5:18 PM, Simon Spero <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>=20
>> On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 11:55 AM, Karen Coyle <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>=20
>>> RDA:parallelTitle -> subclassOf ->RDA:titleProper-> subclassOf ->dcterms=
:title [1]
>>>=20
>>> I'm still waiting to see a solution that implements this, and implements=
 it simply and efficiently.=20
>>> [1] In particular because you can also have:
>>> foaf:name -> subclassOf -> dcterms:title
>>> since the definition of dcterms:title is " A name given to the resource.=
" and anything -- documents, towns, people, chairs -- can be a resource.
>> =20
>> I think you mean sub property, not sub class...
>>=20
>> This kind of simple entailment is trivially handled at scale, either at l=
oad time, or at run time- this is not new technology. =20
>=20
> Simon, I'm not saying it's novel, but it's also non-trivial, especially if=
 you're talking in terms of SPARQL (rather than just RDF graphs in general).=
  There aren't many (any?) free triple stores that support inferencing/reaso=
ning, at least not in any serious sense (Fuseki/TDB supports RDFS reasoning v=
ia riot, I think, but only if you ingest your triples with their inferred en=
tailments, which massively increases your index size; 4-Store doesn't suppor=
t reasoning at all, although there are 3rd party projects that claim to prov=
ide it; OWLIM-Lite does, but it's quite limited in how much it can scale; Mu=
lgara? No clue, but I don't think so; etc.) and Virtuoso, Allegrograph, Star=
dog, etc. aren't cheap.
>=20
> And all this implies that a reasoning-aware triple store is *required* for=
 this stuff, which is, in my mind, problematic.  Take, for example, id.loc.g=
ov, which doesn't (or didn't, at any rate) use anything besides a regular RD=
BMS, since the domain it was modeling was known and finite, much like most a=
pplications are.
>=20
> I think a good analogy here is Z39.50: think of how libraries have impleme=
nted this historically.  Basically, they've just deferred to their vendor's i=
mplementation on this because it's niche and they have (really) no idea how i=
t works or even what an ideal implementation would look like.  The vendors, s=
ensing the libraries' ambivalence and ignorance towards (and being just as i=
gnorant and ambivalent themselves), do the absolute minimum necessary to "co=
mply".
>=20
> I can't imagine that a future where we replace "MARC store with Z39.50 int=
erface" with "triple store with SPARQL endpoint" looking all that much diffe=
rent, honestly, and while I don't think we should let that hold us back, I a=
lso think it needs to be taken into consideration somewhat.
>=20
> -Ross.
>=20
>>=20
>> Well known techniques can be used in conjunction with pre-computation ove=
r the class or property hierarchy, to reduce this kind of transitive computa=
tion to checking to see if an integer falls within one or more ranges.=20
>>=20
>> Simon=20
>=20

--Apple-Mail-0BAD4606-9370-4BF7-B6EE-281F989F0FF6
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64

PGh0bWw+PGhlYWQ+PG1ldGEgaHR0cC1lcXVpdj0iY29udGVudC10eXBlIiBjb250ZW50PSJ0ZXh0
L2h0bWw7IGNoYXJzZXQ9dXRmLTgiPjwvaGVhZD48Ym9keSBkaXI9ImF1dG8iPjxkaXY+SSB0aGlu
ayB0aGF0IGRvbWFpbiBleHBlcnRzIHNob3VsZCB0dW5lIG91dCBvZiB0aGlzIGRpc2N1c3Npb24g
YmVjYXVzZSBieSB0aGUgdGltZSBCSUJGUkFNRSBpcyAicmVhbCIgKGlmIGl0IGV2ZXIgaXMpIHRo
ZSB0b29scyB3aWxsIGJlIGNhcGFibGUgb2YgaW5mZXJlbmNpbmcgYXQgc2NhbGUuIFRoZSBmYWN0
IHRoYXQgbW9zdCBkYXRhIGNvbnN1bWVycyBkb24ndCBrbm93IHdoYXQgaW5mZXJlbmNpbmcgaXMg
c2hvdWxkIGZhY3RvciBvdXQuPC9kaXY+PGRpdj48YnI+PC9kaXY+PGRpdj5KZWZmPGJyPjxicj5T
ZW50IGZyb20gbXkgaVBhZDwvZGl2PjxkaXY+PGJyPk9uIE1hciAxMywgMjAxMywgYXQgMTA6MDEg
UE0sICJSb3NzIFNpbmdlciIgJmx0OzxhIGhyZWY9Im1haWx0bzpyb3NzZnNpbmdlckBHTUFJTC5D
T00iPnJvc3Nmc2luZ2VyQEdNQUlMLkNPTTwvYT4mZ3Q7IHdyb3RlOjxicj48YnI+PC9kaXY+PGJs
b2NrcXVvdGUgdHlwZT0iY2l0ZSI+PGRpdj48bWV0YSBodHRwLWVxdWl2PSJDb250ZW50LVR5cGUi
IGNvbnRlbnQ9InRleHQvaHRtbCBjaGFyc2V0PWlzby04ODU5LTEiPjxicj48ZGl2PjxkaXY+T24g
TWFyIDEzLCAyMDEzLCBhdCA1OjE4IFBNLCBTaW1vbiBTcGVybyAmbHQ7PGEgaHJlZj0ibWFpbHRv
OnNlc3VuY2VkdUBHTUFJTC5DT00iPnNlc3VuY2VkdUBHTUFJTC5DT008L2E+Jmd0OyB3cm90ZTo8
L2Rpdj48YnIgY2xhc3M9IkFwcGxlLWludGVyY2hhbmdlLW5ld2xpbmUiPjxibG9ja3F1b3RlIHR5
cGU9ImNpdGUiPk9uIFdlZCwgTWFyIDEzLCAyMDEzIGF0IDExOjU1IEFNLCBLYXJlbiBDb3lsZSA8
c3BhbiBkaXI9Imx0ciI+Jmx0OzxhIGhyZWY9Im1haWx0bzpsaXN0c0BrY295bGUubmV0IiB0YXJn
ZXQ9Il9ibGFuayI+bGlzdHNAa2NveWxlLm5ldDwvYT4mZ3Q7PC9zcGFuPiB3cm90ZTo8YnI+PGRp
diBjbGFzcz0iZ21haWxfcXVvdGUiPjxibG9ja3F1b3RlIGNsYXNzPSJnbWFpbF9xdW90ZSIgc3R5
bGU9Im1hcmdpbjowIDAgMCAuOGV4O2JvcmRlci1sZWZ0OjFweCAjY2NjIHNvbGlkO3BhZGRpbmct
bGVmdDoxZXgiPg0KDQogIA0KICAgIA0KICANCiAgPGRpdiB0ZXh0PSIjMDAwMDAwIiBiZ2NvbG9y
PSIjRkZGRkZGIj48YnI+DQogICAgUkRBOnBhcmFsbGVsVGl0bGUgLSZndDsgc3ViY2xhc3NPZiAt
Jmd0O1JEQTp0aXRsZVByb3Blci0mZ3Q7DQogICAgc3ViY2xhc3NPZiAtJmd0O2RjdGVybXM6dGl0
bGUgWzFdPGJyPg0KICAgIDxicj4NCiAgICBJJ20gc3RpbGwgd2FpdGluZyB0byBzZWUgYSBzb2x1
dGlvbiB0aGF0IGltcGxlbWVudHMgdGhpcywgYW5kDQogICAgaW1wbGVtZW50cyBpdCBzaW1wbHkg
YW5kIGVmZmljaWVudGx5LiZuYnNwOzxicj48L2Rpdj48L2Jsb2NrcXVvdGU+PGJsb2NrcXVvdGUg
Y2xhc3M9ImdtYWlsX3F1b3RlIiBzdHlsZT0ibWFyZ2luOjBweCAwcHggMHB4IDAuOGV4O2JvcmRl
ci1sZWZ0LXdpZHRoOjFweDtib3JkZXItbGVmdC1jb2xvcjpyZ2IoMjA0LDIwNCwyMDQpO2JvcmRl
ci1sZWZ0LXN0eWxlOnNvbGlkO3BhZGRpbmctbGVmdDoxZXgiPg0KPHNwYW4gc3R5bGU9ImNvbG9y
OnJnYigzNCwzNCwzNCk7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6YXJpYWwsc2Fucy1zZXJpZjtmb250LXNpemU6MTIu
ODAwMDAwMTkwNzM0ODYzcHg7YmFja2dyb3VuZC1jb2xvcjpyZ2IoMjU1LDI1NSwyNTUpIj5bMV0g
SW4gcGFydGljdWxhciBiZWNhdXNlIHlvdSBjYW4gYWxzbyBoYXZlOjwvc3Bhbj48YnIgc3R5bGU9
ImNvbG9yOnJnYigzNCwzNCwzNCk7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6YXJpYWwsc2Fucy1zZXJpZjtmb250LXNp
emU6MTIuODAwMDAwMTkwNzM0ODYzcHg7YmFja2dyb3VuZC1jb2xvcjpyZ2IoMjU1LDI1NSwyNTUp
Ij4NCjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJjb2xvcjpyZ2IoMzQsMzQsMzQpO2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OmFyaWFsLHNh
bnMtc2VyaWY7Zm9udC1zaXplOjEyLjgwMDAwMDE5MDczNDg2M3B4O2JhY2tncm91bmQtY29sb3I6
cmdiKDI1NSwyNTUsMjU1KSI+Zm9hZjpuYW1lIC0mZ3Q7IHN1YmNsYXNzT2YgLSZndDsgZGN0ZXJt
czp0aXRsZTwvc3Bhbj48YnIgc3R5bGU9ImNvbG9yOnJnYigzNCwzNCwzNCk7Zm9udC1mYW1pbHk6
YXJpYWwsc2Fucy1zZXJpZjtmb250LXNpemU6MTIuODAwMDAwMTkwNzM0ODYzcHg7YmFja2dyb3Vu
ZC1jb2xvcjpyZ2IoMjU1LDI1NSwyNTUpIj4NCjxzcGFuIHN0eWxlPSJjb2xvcjpyZ2IoMzQsMzQs
MzQpO2ZvbnQtZmFtaWx5OmFyaWFsLHNhbnMtc2VyaWY7Zm9udC1zaXplOjEyLjgwMDAwMDE5MDcz
NDg2M3B4O2JhY2tncm91bmQtY29sb3I6cmdiKDI1NSwyNTUsMjU1KSI+c2luY2UgdGhlIGRlZmlu
aXRpb24gb2YgZGN0ZXJtczp0aXRsZSBpcyAiIEEgbmFtZSBnaXZlbiB0byB0aGUgcmVzb3VyY2Uu
IiBhbmQgYW55dGhpbmcgLS0gZG9jdW1lbnRzLCB0b3ducywgcGVvcGxlLCBjaGFpcnMgLS0gY2Fu
IGJlIGEgcmVzb3VyY2UuPC9zcGFuPjwvYmxvY2txdW90ZT4NCjxkaXY+Jm5ic3A7PC9kaXY+PGRp
dj5JIHRoaW5rIHlvdSBtZWFuIHN1YiBwcm9wZXJ0eSwgbm90IHN1YiBjbGFzcy4uLjwvZGl2Pjxk
aXY+PGJyPjwvZGl2PjxkaXY+VGhpcyBraW5kIG9mIHNpbXBsZSBlbnRhaWxtZW50IGlzIHRyaXZp
YWxseSBoYW5kbGVkIGF0IHNjYWxlLCBlaXRoZXIgYXQgbG9hZCB0aW1lLCBvciBhdCBydW4gdGlt
ZS0gdGhpcyBpcyBub3QgbmV3IHRlY2hub2xvZ3kuICZuYnNwOzwvZGl2PjwvZGl2PjwvYmxvY2tx
dW90ZT48ZGl2Pjxicj48L2Rpdj5TaW1vbiwgSSdtIG5vdCBzYXlpbmcgaXQncyBub3ZlbCwgYnV0
IGl0J3MgYWxzbyBub24tdHJpdmlhbCwgZXNwZWNpYWxseSBpZiB5b3UncmUgdGFsa2luZyBpbiB0
ZXJtcyBvZiBTUEFSUUwgKHJhdGhlciB0aGFuIGp1c3QgUkRGIGdyYXBocyBpbiBnZW5lcmFsKS4g
Jm5ic3A7VGhlcmUgYXJlbid0IG1hbnkgKGFueT8pIGZyZWUgdHJpcGxlIHN0b3JlcyB0aGF0IHN1
cHBvcnQgaW5mZXJlbmNpbmcvcmVhc29uaW5nLCBhdCBsZWFzdCBub3QgaW4gYW55IHNlcmlvdXMg
c2Vuc2UgKEZ1c2VraS9UREIgc3VwcG9ydHMgUkRGUyByZWFzb25pbmcgdmlhIHJpb3QsIEkgdGhp
bmssIGJ1dCBvbmx5IGlmIHlvdSBpbmdlc3QgeW91ciB0cmlwbGVzIHdpdGggdGhlaXIgaW5mZXJy
ZWQgZW50YWlsbWVudHMsIHdoaWNoIG1hc3NpdmVseSBpbmNyZWFzZXMgeW91ciBpbmRleCBzaXpl
OyA0LVN0b3JlIGRvZXNuJ3Qgc3VwcG9ydCByZWFzb25pbmcgYXQgYWxsLCBhbHRob3VnaCB0aGVy
ZSBhcmUgM3JkIHBhcnR5IHByb2plY3RzIHRoYXQgY2xhaW0gdG8gcHJvdmlkZSBpdDsgT1dMSU0t
TGl0ZSBkb2VzLCBidXQgaXQncyBxdWl0ZSBsaW1pdGVkIGluIGhvdyBtdWNoIGl0IGNhbiBzY2Fs
ZTsgTXVsZ2FyYT8gTm8gY2x1ZSwgYnV0IEkgZG9uJ3QgdGhpbmsgc287IGV0Yy4pIGFuZCBWaXJ0
dW9zbywgQWxsZWdyb2dyYXBoLCBTdGFyZG9nLCBldGMuIGFyZW4ndCBjaGVhcC48L2Rpdj48ZGl2
Pjxicj48L2Rpdj48ZGl2PkFuZCBhbGwgdGhpcyBpbXBsaWVzIHRoYXQgYSByZWFzb25pbmctYXdh
cmUgdHJpcGxlIHN0b3JlIGlzICpyZXF1aXJlZCogZm9yIHRoaXMgc3R1ZmYsIHdoaWNoIGlzLCBp
biBteSBtaW5kLCBwcm9ibGVtYXRpYy4gJm5ic3A7VGFrZSwgZm9yIGV4YW1wbGUsIDxhIGhyZWY9
Imh0dHA6Ly9pZC5sb2MuZ292Ij5pZC5sb2MuZ292PC9hPiwgd2hpY2ggZG9lc24ndCAob3IgZGlk
bid0LCBhdCBhbnkgcmF0ZSkgdXNlIGFueXRoaW5nIGJlc2lkZXMgYSByZWd1bGFyIFJEQk1TLCBz
aW5jZSB0aGUgZG9tYWluIGl0IHdhcyBtb2RlbGluZyB3YXMga25vd24gYW5kIGZpbml0ZSwgbXVj
aCBsaWtlIG1vc3QgYXBwbGljYXRpb25zIGFyZS48L2Rpdj48ZGl2Pjxicj48L2Rpdj48ZGl2Pkkg
dGhpbmsgYSBnb29kIGFuYWxvZ3kgaGVyZSBpcyBaMzkuNTA6IHRoaW5rIG9mIGhvdyBsaWJyYXJp
ZXMgaGF2ZSBpbXBsZW1lbnRlZCB0aGlzIGhpc3RvcmljYWxseS4gJm5ic3A7QmFzaWNhbGx5LCB0
aGV5J3ZlIGp1c3QgZGVmZXJyZWQgdG8gdGhlaXIgdmVuZG9yJ3MgaW1wbGVtZW50YXRpb24gb24g
dGhpcyBiZWNhdXNlIGl0J3MgbmljaGUgYW5kIHRoZXkgaGF2ZSAocmVhbGx5KSBubyBpZGVhIGhv
dyBpdCB3b3JrcyBvciBldmVuIHdoYXQgYW4gaWRlYWwgaW1wbGVtZW50YXRpb24gd291bGQgbG9v
ayBsaWtlLiAmbmJzcDtUaGUgdmVuZG9ycywgc2Vuc2luZyB0aGUgbGlicmFyaWVzJyBhbWJpdmFs
ZW5jZSBhbmQgaWdub3JhbmNlIHRvd2FyZHMgKGFuZCBiZWluZyBqdXN0IGFzIGlnbm9yYW50IGFu
ZCBhbWJpdmFsZW50IHRoZW1zZWx2ZXMpLCBkbyB0aGUgYWJzb2x1dGUgbWluaW11bSBuZWNlc3Nh
cnkgdG8gImNvbXBseSIuPC9kaXY+PGRpdj48YnI+PC9kaXY+PGRpdj5JIGNhbid0IGltYWdpbmUg
dGhhdCBhIGZ1dHVyZSB3aGVyZSB3ZSByZXBsYWNlICJNQVJDIHN0b3JlIHdpdGggWjM5LjUwIGlu
dGVyZmFjZSIgd2l0aCAidHJpcGxlIHN0b3JlIHdpdGggU1BBUlFMIGVuZHBvaW50IiBsb29raW5n
IGFsbCB0aGF0IG11Y2ggZGlmZmVyZW50LCBob25lc3RseSwgYW5kIHdoaWxlIEkgZG9uJ3QgdGhp
bmsgd2Ugc2hvdWxkIGxldCB0aGF0IGhvbGQgdXMgYmFjaywgSSBhbHNvIHRoaW5rIGl0IG5lZWRz
IHRvIGJlIHRha2VuIGludG8gY29uc2lkZXJhdGlvbiBzb21ld2hhdC48L2Rpdj48ZGl2Pjxicj48
L2Rpdj48ZGl2Pi1Sb3NzLjwvZGl2PjxkaXY+PGJyPjxibG9ja3F1b3RlIHR5cGU9ImNpdGUiPjxk
aXYgY2xhc3M9ImdtYWlsX3F1b3RlIj4NCjxkaXY+PGJyPjwvZGl2PjxkaXY+V2VsbCBrbm93biB0
ZWNobmlxdWVzIGNhbiBiZSB1c2VkIGluIGNvbmp1bmN0aW9uIHdpdGggcHJlLWNvbXB1dGF0aW9u
IG92ZXIgdGhlIGNsYXNzIG9yIHByb3BlcnR5IGhpZXJhcmNoeSwgdG8gcmVkdWNlIHRoaXMga2lu
ZCBvZiB0cmFuc2l0aXZlIGNvbXB1dGF0aW9uIHRvIGNoZWNraW5nIHRvIHNlZSBpZiBhbiBpbnRl
Z2VyIGZhbGxzIHdpdGhpbiBvbmUgb3IgbW9yZSByYW5nZXMuJm5ic3A7PC9kaXY+DQo8ZGl2Pjxi
cj48L2Rpdj48ZGl2PlNpbW9uJm5ic3A7PC9kaXY+PGRpdj48YnI+PC9kaXY+PGRpdj4mbmJzcDs8
L2Rpdj48L2Rpdj4NCjwvYmxvY2txdW90ZT48L2Rpdj48YnI+PC9kaXY+PC9ibG9ja3F1b3RlPjwv
Ym9keT48L2h0bWw+
--Apple-Mail-0BAD4606-9370-4BF7-B6EE-281F989F0FF6--

------------------------------

End of BIBFRAME Digest - 12 Mar 2013 to 13 Mar 2013 (#2013-49)
**************************************************************

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

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