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  August 2013

BIBFRAME August 2013

Subject:

Re: Modeling Question

From:

"Young,Jeff (OR)" <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

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

Date:

Fri, 2 Aug 2013 14:25:34 +0000

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (222 lines)

You're right, I should have phrased it more carefully.

Our Linked Data URIs identify bibliographic resources that exist "out there somewhere". The existence of those things does not depend on our identifiers or our descriptions. 

Contrary to what you say, though, our Linked Data URIs do NOT identify an OCLC-specific description. Our Linked Data URIs do a 303 (See Other) redirect to *different URI*. It's that second URI that identifies the OCLC-specific description, not the Linked Data URI.

Jeff

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Karen Coyle
> Sent: Friday, August 02, 2013 10:14 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [BIBFRAME] Modeling Question
> 
> Jeff, your statement seems to have an internal contradiction. The OCLC
> number identifies only "resources described in WorldCat" but the
> resources are not specific to WorldCat - they would exist even if
> WorldCat did not. So the OCLC number is the resource as it is described
> in WorldCat, and to my mind it means that the OCLC number identifies
> the OCLC-specific description.
> 
> That said, I agree with Adrian that we have long used such numbers as
> "metaphors" for the resource described by the metadata. At the same
> time, such numbers ALSO identify the metadata record, and we use them
> with that purpose in the cataloging workflow.
> 
> kc
> 
> 
> On 8/2/13 6:03 AM, Young,Jeff (OR) wrote:
> > 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]>
> 
> --
> 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

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

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager