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  May 2013

BIBFRAME May 2013

Subject:

Re: Bibframe/MARC crosswalk?

From:

Karen Coyle <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

[log in to unmask]

Date:

Sun, 26 May 2013 11:28:52 -0700

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (122 lines)

Jeff,

You can have a data standard and a standard way to exchange data, even 
in the linked data world. I personally don't call it a record. Some 
people might. But I don't think it matters what we call it. And 
application profiles are descriptions of graphs that can include 
constraints that are related to data creation but that do not constrain 
use on the open web. Tom Baker and I will have a discussion paper out 
on that in June, leading up to the discussion at DC2013 [1]. I think 
your knowledge of OWL would be an asset to that discussion, since we 
definitely have not solidified our ideas - we want a lot of input. 
Also, that discussion will of necessity inter-twine with the discussion 
on quality assurance in RDF [2] that is taking place right after the 
DC2103 meeting.

kc
[1] http://dcevents.dublincore.org/IntConf/index/pages/view/APaltOO
[2] 
http://www.w3.org/blog/SW/2013/05/22/w3cs-rdf-validation-workshop-practical-assurances-for-quality-rdf-data/

On Sun May 26 10:34:23 2013, Young,Jeff (OR) wrote:
> I'm not saying all installations would have to use the exact same mapping file. They could tweak it to deal with their local idioms.
>
> I'm not sure what you mean by "future data carrier". Are you talking about some new kinds of closed-world graphs (aka "records")? I also hear people talking about "lightweight abstraction layers". I also hear people talking about "application profiles". I could name others. Same things? A record by any other name would still smell.
>
> Jeff
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On May 26, 2013, at 12:56 PM, "Karen Coyle" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> Jeff, I don't think that the question of programming tools is the hard one. There are lots of programming tools. What will be difficult will be understanding and working with the huge variety in data practices - most of which are undocumented, and some of which are idiosyncratic if not down-right unfortunate (such as the addition of ISBNs for different manifestations to a single MARC record, which has been much discussed here). It's one thing to address a data standard - it's another thing to address the actual practice.
>>
>> And as for that practice - I'm not saying that catalogers have been sloppy or remiss. They have worked, often in isolation, to try to satisfy a whole panoply of requirements: requirements related to sharing; requirements related to service to a specific population of users; requirements related to systems functionality that is beyond their control.
>>
>> We need a future data carrier, but I caution that we have to continue to expect a great deal of variability in the data itself. Rather than making "rules" for how to convert from MARC to BIBFRAME, we should be creating flexible conversion routines that libraries and systems can use with knowledge of their own practices and needs, and then we need to talk collectively about coordinating in a shared environment. I actually think that the *intention* of BIBFRAME is to facilitate that flexibility, and maybe we have been remiss in thinking that the LC MARC-to-BIBFRAME process = BIBFRAME. This is why I would like there to be BIBFRAME discussions that are not solely "how to transform MARC." That's only one role that BIBFRAME will fulfill, I hope.
>>
>> kc
>>
>> On Sun May 26 08:33:28 2013, Young,Jeff (OR) wrote:
>>> I suspect that some ILS systems use relational databases. If so,
>>> someone could download D2RQ or one of the more modern R2RML tools and
>>> use that to map their data to the BIBFRAME model. They could then
>>> publish that mapping for other installations of that ILS system to use.
>>>
>>> http://www.w3.org/TR/r2rml/
>>>
>>> Jeff
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>
>>> On May 26, 2013, at 11:05 AM, "Karen Coyle" <[log in to unmask]
>>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Mac,
>>>>
>>>> I'm assuming that there will be programs available, just as now there
>>>> are programs for converting from MARC21 to MARCXML. What I am less
>>>> confident about is whether these programs, built for LC's records,
>>>> will give the desired results for other libraries. There is a huge
>>>> difference between a single library with a fairly coherent set of
>>>> practices [*] and the variety of actual data in the range of
>>>> libraries that you work with. What would be great would be the
>>>> establishment of an open source repository where people who make
>>>> modifications or write their own programs could make those programs
>>>> available for others. It may be easier to adapt a program that has
>>>> worked for, say, multi-lingual catalogs than to begin with a program
>>>> designed for a library with only one language of cataloging.
>>>>
>>>> kc
>>>> [*] I was struck by a remark of Kevin's about the ISBNs that they
>>>> have found the when there are multiples, the first is for the
>>>> hardback. I can very much imagine that being the case in LC's
>>>> catalog, given their purchase and work-flow, but as you know, 1) not
>>>> all systems keep the fields in order 2) not all libraries purchase
>>>> the hardback before the trade paperback. So that's an example of
>>>> something that LC can rely on for their data that may not generalize
>>>> to other libraries.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 5/25/13 7:56 PM, J. McRee Elrod wrote:
>>>>> When/if Bibframe is implemented by the national libraries and
>>>>> bibliographic utilities, will there be a publically available Bibframe
>>>>> to NMARC crosswalk for those systems still in MARC?  Would OCLC offer
>>>>> a MARC export?
>>>>>
>>>>> Might prioducing MARC21 records from Bibframe be a niche market for
>>>>> SLC, as is oroducing AACR2 compatible records from RDA, and UKMARC
>>>>> from MARC21?
>>>>>
>>>>> Of what online conversion programs should we be aware?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>    __       __   J. McRee (Mac) Elrod ([log in to unmask]
>>>>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>)
>>>>>   {__  |   /     Special Libraries Cataloguing HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
>>>>>   ___} |__ \__________________________________________________________
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Karen Coyle
>>>> [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]> http://kcoyle.net
>>>> ph: 1-510-540-7596
>>>> m: 1-510-435-8234
>>>> skype: kcoylenet
>>
>> --
>> Karen Coyle
>> [log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net
>> ph: 1-510-540-7596
>> m: 1-510-435-8234
>> skype: kcoylenet
>>

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

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

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

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager