Note that WorldCat Linked Data URIs identify the bibliographic resource, not the record. For example:

<http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/1>
	a schema:Book;
	schema:name "The Rand McNally book of favorite pastimes";
	.

These are the identifiers that the Linked Data community should be using when referring to resources described in WorldCat.

Jeff

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Adrian Pohl
> Sent: Friday, August 02, 2013 5:26 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [BIBFRAME] Modeling Question
> 
> We discussed this question 2011 in the culturegraph project, see e.g.
> my question at answers.semanticweb.com [1] (caution: I didn't fully
> understand xsd and custom datatypes at that time). There are only
> replies to this question that either suggest using URIs as identifiers
> (like Rob) or using specific properties and nobody advocates using
> custom datatypes. Generally, specific properties are a more elegant
> approach and it's quite awkward writing a SPARQL query where you take
> into account datatypes. Also - as Jeff already said - SPARQL runs into
> problems comparing custom datatypes. (see also [3])
> 
> The same question came up again developing the DINI-KIM (KIM =
> Competence Centre Interoperable Metadata) working group's
> recommendations for publishing bibliographic data about textual
> resources as RDF, see [2] (German). The DINI KIM recommendations are
> bascially an application profile for publishing bibliographic data in
> RDF with the goal to reuse as much existing properties as possible
> without creating new ones. These recommendations include both the use
> of identifier-specific properties and of custom datatypes (see below).
> 
> Another question in the context of representing identifiers in RDF is,
> that some identifiers are identifying a bibliographic resource like a
> book, journal etc. (ISBN, ISSN, DOI etc.) while others are identifying
> a bibliographic record (OCLC number [4], LCCN [5] etc.). See [6] for an
> illustration of the two different kinds of identifiers. So, if you take
> the rigorous distinction between a resource and its description in the
> Linked Data world into account you might have problems with asserting
> something like:
> 
> http://example.org/moby-dick
>     dc:title "Moby Dick ;
>     bf:identifier http://lccn.loc.gov/56014046 .
> 
> I think this is a pseudo-problem but I thought it might make sense if
> Bibframe made this clear once and for all. As it already is common
> practice to use record IDs "metaphorically" as IDs for the
> bibliographic resource described by the identified record and as one
> can assume that this practice can't be changed, we should stick with
> this approach. Also, I can't see where it does any harm.
> 
> However, as I said we pondered on this again in the DINI KIM working
> group in addition to the closely related question how to link to
> same/similar resource for which already an HTTP-URI and an RDF
> description exists. We came up with the following proposal:
> 
> 1. Identifiers that exist in form of a URI (like URN and DOI) won't be
> asserted with dc:identifier or something similar but there will be a
> link to the resource using the umbel:isLike property. (Using owl:sameAs
> is always problematic in case you are not totally sure you have two
> URIs for the very same resource. False identity assertions might lead o
> incorrect inferencing. (For the problems with the use of owl:sameAs see
> the resources listed at [7].) 2. Well known identifiers like OCLC
> number or LCCN will be named using the respective properties from the
> Bibliographic Ontology. (As you don't reuse existing properties in
> Bibframe that means you would have to create new redundant properties
> if you follow this approach.) 3. For identifiers where no property
> exists, we recommend using dc:identifier in combination with a custom
> datatype. Additionally, for local and regional identifiers (e.g. German
> National Bibliography ID, regional IDs from the different German
> Library Networks) we encourage a decentral creation of new properties
> by the respective institution that mints the IDs in the first place.
> 
> As you can see, we both recommend the use of properties - if they exist
> - and the use of custom datatypes. I tried to avoid the recommendation
> of custom datatypes but wouldn't prevail. Hopefully, LoC won't start
> creating new datatypes but new properties, if at all.
> 
> All the best
> Adrian
> 
> [1] http://answers.semanticweb.com/questions/3572/xsd-or-vocabulary
> 
> [2] https://wiki.dnb.de/x/TILvAw
> 
> [3]http://patterns.dataincubator.org/book/custom-datatype.html
> 
> [4] Jeff Young wrote 2011 on W3C's public-lld mailing list: "OCLC
> numbers identify bibliographic records, not manifestations". URL:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-lld/2011Mar/0163.html
> 
> [5] The LCCN permalinks FAQs read: "LCCN Permalinks are persistent URLs
> for bibliographic records in the Library of Congress Online Catalog and
> authority records in Library of Congress Authorities. These links are
> constructed using the record's LCCN (or Library of Congress Control
> Number), an identifier assigned by the Library of Congress to
> bibliographic and authority records." URL:
> http://lccn.loc.gov/lccnperm-faq.html#n1
> 
> [6] https://wiki1.hbz-nrw.de/download/attachments/2328255/Biblio-
> Identifier.png
> 
> [7] http://www.bibsonomy.org/user/acka47/owl%3AsameAs
> 
> 
> Adrian Pohl
> - Linked Open Data -
> hbz - Hochschulbibliothekszentrum des Landes NRW
> Tel: (+49)(0)221 - 400 75 235
> http://www.hbz-nrw.de
> 
> 
> 
> >>> On 1.8.2013 at 20:12, "Trail, Nate" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > All,
> >
> > We're thinking about modeling identifiers (and other properties?) in
> > two
> > ways:
> >
> > 1) generic property with a more specific data type:
> >
> >                 bf:identifer
> > "9780394856308"^^http://example/org/isbn13
> >
> > or
> >
> > 2) specific property:
> >                                                bf:isbn13
> "9780394856308"
> >
> > where 'bf:isbn' is a subproperty of 'bf:identifier'.
> >
> > How does the community feel about these two options, and why?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Nate
> >
> > -------------------------------------------
> > Nate Trail
> > -------------------------------------------
> > LS/TECH/NDMSO
> > Library of Congress
> > 202-707-2193
> > [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>