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 2014

BIBFRAME August 2014

Subject:

Re: Blank nodes, xml, ttl was: [BIBFRAME] Proposal to handle "Providers" differently

From:

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

Reply-To:

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

Date:

Fri, 1 Aug 2014 11:49:03 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (169 lines)

I'm a little confused by this thread. I crudely tripled the example (as shown below my sig) and ran the query given against it (using Apache Jena, which was convenient) and got-- distinguished blank nodes and their appropriate bf:Organization-specific bf:labels. Then, to be more sure about the matter, I tried:

SELECT ?subject ?label
    WHERE { ?subject bf:publication ?publication .
                ?publication bf:providerName ?bnode .
                 ?bnode bf:label ?label . }

And got my named resources and the organization-labels for which I asked, in the right correspondence. Now that's exactly what I would have expected, working through these queries in my mind. I'm as much against multiplying blank nodes as anyone, but I don't understand what the particular problem here is…? Perhaps you can say what is the expected result of the search and what you get instead?

---
A. Soroka
The University of Virginia Library

<http://example.org/1>  a bf:Instance;
    bf:publication [
        a bf:Provider ;
        bf:providerDate "1966" ;
        bf:providerName [ a bf:Organization ; bf:label "Hamlyn" ] ;
        bf:providerPlace [ a bf:Place ; bf:label "London" ]
    ] .
<http://example.org/2>  a bf:Instance;
    bf:publication [
        a bf:Provider ;
        bf:providerDate "1967" ;
        bf:providerName [ a bf:Organization ; bf:label "Hamlyn2" ] ;
        bf:providerPlace [ a bf:Place ; bf:label "London2" ]
    ] .
<http://example.org/3>  a bf:Instance;
    bf:publication [
        a bf:Provider ;
        bf:providerDate "1968" ;
        bf:providerName [ a bf:Organization ; bf:label "Hamlyn3" ] ;
        bf:providerPlace [ a bf:Place ; bf:label "London3" ]
    ] .


On Aug 1, 2014, at 11:14 AM, Karen Coyle <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Nate,
> 
> I agree with what you say below, but I don't think it addresses my concern which is about the use of blank nodes. Regardless of whether one has a URI value or a literal value, a node can be named or blank. I know that there is a tendency to "go blank" when punting on the decision URI/literal, but then you need to make some other adjustments in your design. As I've already shown, the use of label in multiple places in the data within blank nodes makes it very hard to retrieve the desired data:
> 
> <http://example.org/1>  a bf:Instance,
>     bf:publication [
>         a bf:Provider ;
>         bf:providerDate "1966" ;
>         bf:providerName [ a bf:Organization ; bf:label "Hamlyn" ] ;
>         bf:providerPlace [ a bf:Place ; bf:label "London" ]
>     ] .
> 
> The reason is that you cannot step through blank nodes to select only the bf:label for either bf:providerName or bf:providerPlace. This search does not work on triples with blank nodes:
> 
> SELECT ?subject ?label
>     WHERE { ?subject bf:providerName ?bnode .
>                  ?bnode bf:label ?label . }
> 
> This could be "solved" by creating specific properties for the labels, such as bf:providerNameLabel. However, the use of bf:label within blank nodes simply does not allow retrieval of the desired literals. Or it could be solved by using named graphs. It does, however, need to be solved.
> 
> kc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On 8/1/14, 6:34 AM, Trail, Nate wrote:
>> Karen,
>> 
>> The current transformation is incomplete in this Provider area, for a couple of reasons. I think we know we'd like to make          <bf:label>University of Michigan Press</bf:label> and          <bf:label>Ann Arbor</bf:label> into uris, but we haven't 'resolved'  where we go to look those things up reliably.
>> Not all of the "Organizations"   in the MARC data are orgs; they might be imprints, or statements like "Distributed by Random House", meaning they are not supposed to be part of  bf:publication, but bf:distribution. etc.
>> There is no imprint lookup service (yet), especially for historic materials.
>> Provider places, as has been pointed out, lack jurisdiction, so we're left to guess that Paris is Paris, France.
>> Those factors being the case, we're assuming that subsequent passes over the data will be able to more cleanly parse it and data-ify, and the bf:label could go away in favor of a uri.
>> 
>> We have a second pass in the works that does lookups to ID.loc.gov for various controlled vocabulary, and may look up other authoritative sources. It's not ready for prime time, however.
>> 
>> Nate
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Karen Coyle
>> Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2014 9:03 PM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: [BIBFRAME] Blank nodes, xml, ttl was: [BIBFRAME] Proposal to handle "Providers" differently
>> 
>> On 7/31/14, 3:30 PM, Ford, Kevin wrote:
>>>> Of course, these have the "blank-node-+-label" problem again (still?).
>>> _:xx and _:yy do not need to be blank nodes.  We've been using a lot of blank nodes in examples, but they do not need to be.
>>> 
>> Kevin,
>> 
>> You are absolutely right, they do not need to be blank nodes. However, my discovery of the issue with "bf:label" and blank nodes was on MARC records that I ran through the BIBFRAME tool [1], not in hand-coded examples. Obviously, BIBFRAME is not "done" so that tool is an approximation of what BIBFRAME could be, but there is an unfortunate reliance on blank nodes in its current state. This fact is somewhat hidden by the use of rdf/xml, and ditto the email examples in turtle, since blank nodes basically disappear in these notations. The proof of the pudding is in the triples. Here is a segment of real BIBFRAME instance data (as transformed from MARC by the BF tool, then converted to turtle and triples using rapper):
>> 
>> **RDFXML:
>> 
>> <bf:publication>
>>    <bf:Provider>
>>      <bf:providerName>
>>        <bf:Organization>
>>          <bf:label>University of Michigan Press</bf:label>
>>        </bf:Organization>
>>      </bf:providerName>
>>      <bf:providerPlace>
>>        <bf:Place>
>>          <bf:label>Ann Arbor</bf:label>
>>        </bf:Place>
>>      </bf:providerPlace>
>>      <bf:providerDate>1995</bf:providerDate>
>>    </bf:Provider>
>> </bf:publication>
>> </rdf>
>> 
>> **turtle:
>> 
>>      bf:publication [
>>          bf:providerDate "1995" ;
>>          bf:providerName [
>>              bf:label "University of Michigan Press" ;
>>              a bf:Organization
>>          ] ;
>>          bf:providerPlace [
>>              bf:label "Ann Arbor" ;
>>              a bf:Place
>>          ] ;
>>          a bf:Provider
>>      ] ;
>> 
>> ** triples
>> 
>> <http://bibframe.org/resources/cYO1404049290/3033010>
>> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type>
>> <http://bibframe.org/vocab/Work> .
>> <http://bibframe.org/resources/cYO1404049290/3033010>
>> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type>
>> <http://bibframe.org/vocab/Text> .
>> _:genid1 <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type>
>> <http://bibframe.org/vocab/Provider> .
>> _:genid2 <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type>
>> <http://bibframe.org/vocab/Organization> .
>> _:genid2 <http://bibframe.org/vocab/label> "University of Michigan Press" .
>> _:genid1 <http://bibframe.org/vocab/providerName> _:genid2 .
>> _:genid3 <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type>
>> <http://bibframe.org/vocab/Place> .
>> _:genid3 <http://bibframe.org/vocab/label> "Ann Arbor" .
>> _:genid1 <http://bibframe.org/vocab/providerPlace> _:genid3 .
>> _:genid1 <http://bibframe.org/vocab/providerDate> "1995" .
>> <http://bibframe.org/resources/cYO1404049290/3033010>
>> <http://bibframe.org/vocab/publication> _:genid1 .
>> 
>> The blank nodes become much more visible.
>> 
>> Many of the examples that we've seen on these recent threads don't
>> actually represent "running code," or at least I couldn't transform any
>> of them using tools that I have. I know this is a discussion, not a
>> coding session, but I think it would be helpful to do a sanity check
>> regarding what we are discussing by creating some working examples.
>> It'll provide a more realistic basis for discussion.
>> 
>> Personally, I'd like to see BIBFRAME move away from the use of blank
>> nodes wherever possible, and so I'd like to see examples that don't use
>> them.
>> 
>> kc
>> [1] http://bibframe.org/tools/transform/start
>> 
> 
> -- 
> 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

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