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  July 2014

BIBFRAME July 2014

Subject:

Re: bf:Title Was: [BIBFRAME] BibFrame and Linked Data: Identifiers

From:

"[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

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

Date:

Fri, 25 Jul 2014 12:58:02 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (142 lines)

One way to think about this might be to ask whether a transliterations or translations are, in fact, separate titles (and therefore deserving of recordation as such) or different "views" of a single title.

Personally, I'm not sure I would like for Bibframe to express an opinion about this kind of question. It seems to me to lie in the domain of cataloging practice and a given decision may require sensitivity to the context of the resource being described. For example, at my institution we have a wealth of material from the Himalayan region. A Tibetan religious manuscript may be named in several forms of Tibetan, several forms of Chinese, and other languages as well. The relationships between these names can be very complex, including different combinations of translation and transliteration and descent as well as arising from different sources at different times.

I would like, as much as possible, for Bibframe to leave decisions about the possible relationships that obtain between them and how they should be expressed in the hands of the expert archivists and catalogers who work with this kind of material locally.

---
A. Soroka
The University of Virginia Library

On Jul 25, 2014, at 12:25 PM, "Ford, Kevin" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> I'm not sure if you a merely noting general use cases for treating strings as special cases, but we've considered alternate methods to handle transliteration and capturing pronunciation is, I believe, out of scope (or at least it has never been defined as a use case; transliteration, however, will be necessary).  Our thinking about how transliteration might be handled is a separate thread (distinct from the bf:Title topic of this thread, which is the only reason I am being cagey here).
> 
> Yours,
> Kevin
> 
> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum
>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Young,Jeff (OR)
>> Sent: Friday, July 25, 2014 11:49 AM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: [BIBFRAME] bf:Title Was: [BIBFRAME] BibFrame and Linked Data:
>> Identifiers
>> 
>> The specialized need to treat strings as things has precedent in SKOS-XL
>> 
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/skos-reference/skos-xl.html
>> 
>> It's a heavyweight mechanism compared to SKOS (Core), but it does allow
>> the string to be described as such. Some example use cases would be to
>> attach pronunciations or transliterations.
>> 
>> Jeff
>> 
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum
>>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of [log in to unmask]
>>> Sent: Friday, July 25, 2014 11:29 AM
>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>> Subject: [BIBFRAME] bf:Title Was: [BIBFRAME] BibFrame and Linked Data:
>>> Identifiers
>>> 
>>> Having now for the first time taken a close look at bf:Title, I'm a
>>> bit taken aback. It appears to be a somewhat mechanical rendition of
>>> MARC
>>> 245 into some kind of RDF. I agree entirely with Karen Coyle about the
>>> need for a discussion about indirection generally, but even on the
>>> assumption that titles are to become entities in their own right (and
>>> addressed as such), bf:Title seems to me to need much pruning and
>>> improvement. I've included some specifics below, and would much
>>> appreciate any response from the Bibframe maintainers.
>>> 
>>> 1) http://bibframe.org/vocab/titleValue.html: "Title being addressed."
>>> 
>>> What is the purpose of this specialized property in the face of the
>>> bf:label that is available to all bf:Resources? What would cause
>>> someone to use it? Is this just MARC 2045$a in a new format?
>>> 
>>> 2) http://bibframe.org/vocab/titleQualifier.html: "Qualifier of title
>>> information to make it unique."
>>> 
>>> Working for the uniqueness of labels goes very much against the
>>> practice of Linked Data. The Title entity is already possessed of an
>>> identifier. If anything more is needed to ensure uniqueness, isn't
>>> something badly wrong with the identifier?
>>> 
>>> 3) http://bibframe.org/vocab/partNumber.html and
>>> http://bibframe.org/vocab/partTitle.html
>>> 
>>> Is there any purpose to this distinction or is this just a case of
>>> MARC 245$n and $p being mechanically preserved? In fact these two
>>> properties have the same range.
>>> 
>>> 4) http://bibframe.org/vocab/formDesignation.html: "Class or genre to
>>> which a Work or Instance belongs."
>>> and
>>> http://bibframe.org/vocab/titleAttribute.html: "Other distinguishing
>>> characteristic of a work, such as version, etc.."
>>> 
>>> These seem very strange to me. In what way are these properties of a
>>> title at all? Is this just a mechanical transfer from MARC 245$k and
>>> $s? This seems to be information that should be recorded on the Work
>>> or Instance.
>>> 
>>> There are some other oddities to me in bf:Title, and it's not at all
>>> clear to me that the amount of indirection it requires is healthy in
>>> itself, but these above are perhaps the most odd and confusing things.
>>> If we can pare down bf:Title, I suspect it will become more obvious to
>>> us whether or not a separate title entity is really useful and should
>>> continue to exist.
>>> 
>>> ---
>>> A. Soroka
>>> The University of Virginia Library
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Jul 24, 2014, at 4:38 PM, Karen Coyle <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On 7/24/14, 1:27 PM, Denenberg, Ray wrote:
>>>>> (I don't think we've thought much about providing identifiers for
>>> titles.)
>>>> I hope you *have* because they are in your data ;-)
>>>> 
>>>> bf:workTitle
>>> <http://bibframe.org/resources/Ahx1405278232/1706459title7> ;
>>>> 
>>>> <http://bibframe.org/resources/Ahx1405278232/1706459title7>
>>>> 
>>>>   bf:titleValue "The adventures of Tom Sawyer" ;
>>>> 
>>>>   a bf:Title .
>>>> 
>>>> bf:instanceTitle
>>> <http://bibframe.org/resources/Ahx1405278232/1706459title33>
>>>> 
>>>> <http://bibframe.org/resources/Ahx1405278232/1706459title33>
>>>> 
>>>>   bf:titleValue "The adventures of Tom Sawyer" ;
>>>> 
>>>>   a bf:Title .
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Those are from a BF record, converted from MARC.[1] I found them
>>> rather odd, myself. It makes some sense to give identifiers to work
>>> titles, although generally the work title alone does not identify a
>>> work.  But I think that this is actually evidence for a discussion
>>> that we have not had yet on the massive level of indirection (blank
>>> and non- blank nodes) in BIBFRAME.
>>>> 
>>>> kc
>>>> 
>>>> [1] http://bibframe.org/resources/Ahx1405278232/1706459.rdf
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> Karen Coyle
>>>> [log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net
>>>> 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

July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
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