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:

"Ford, Kevin" <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

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

Date:

Fri, 1 Aug 2014 12:08:08 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (187 lines)

> I do
> want to point out that there are at least two ways to reduce their numbers.
> One, don't make them to begin with. {grin} Two, reconcile them out. 
-- Yes, the first would be ideal, the second is the dirty little secret that no one talks about.

The first pass often is very blank nodey (it's Friday so we'll just start making up words).  It is then important to take a second pass and reconcile those anonymous resources with known resources (those with URIs, ideally of the HTTP variety).  This could happen as part of the first pass, but it is often common to separate these steps.

The "raw" MARC2BIBFRAME transformation generates blank nodes because it makes no attempt to create HTTP URIs nor does it try to reconcile resources.  That's a programming decision but not an architecture decision.  Those blank nodes can be converted the HTTP URIs /and/ reconciliation can be attempted.

In fact, to underscore that last point, when we generate the sample data sets, we not only convert nearly all blank nodes to HTTP URIs but we also attempt to reconcile the names and subject headings with ID.LOC.GOV.  For example:

http://bibframe.org/resources/sample-lc-2/bibframe.rdf

Yours,
Kevin


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of [log in to unmask]
> Sent: Friday, August 01, 2014 11:13 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [BIBFRAME] Blank nodes, xml, ttl was: [BIBFRAME] Proposal to
> handle "Providers" differently
> 
> I'm largely in agreement about the un-desireablitlity of blank nodes. I do
> want to point out that there are at least two ways to reduce their numbers.
> One, don't make them to begin with. {grin} Two, reconcile them out. What I
> mean by that is perhaps best shown in a quick example. Let's take Karen
> Coyle's 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 .
> 
> This is the output of marc2bibframe, and it is indeed chock-full of blank
> nodes. Let's assume (just for the sake of the example) that we are going to
> use Geonames and DBpedia. (And I'm going to start using prefixes in the RDF,
> just for readability.) We might make a move like:
> 
> <http://bibframe.org/resources/cYO1404049290/3033010> rdf:type bf:Work .
> <http://bibframe.org/resources/cYO1404049290/3033010> rdf:type bf:Text .
> <http://bibframe.org/resources/cYO1404049290/3033010> bf:publication
> _:genid1 .
> _:genid1 rdf:type bf:Provider .
>  dbpedia:University_of_Michigan_Press rdf:type bf:Organization .
>  dbpedia:University_of_Michigan_Press bf:label "University of Michigan
> Press" .
> _:genid1 bf:providerName dbpedia:University_of_Michigan_Press .
> geonames:4984247 rdf:type bibframe:Place .
> geonames:4984247 bf:label "Ann Arbor" .
> _:genid1 bf:providerPlace geonames:4984247 .
> _:genid1 bf:providerDate "1995" .
> 
> (As per an earlier thread on this list, many folks would use local identifiers
> with a store of co-reference. I haven't shown that because it's not to my
> particular point, but I'm in no way arguing against it.)
> 
> That killed two blank nodes, but not the third. The claim I'm making is that it's
> not the absolute number of blank nodes coming out of an automated
> transform that should bother us. It's the number that are more-or-less
> inherent in the model, and we cannot gauge _that_ number over
> unreconciled data. We can predict it to some limited extent directly from the
> model, but we are going to produce different volumes of blank nodes by
> exercising Bibframe over different bodies of data, with different regimes of
> co-reference management, with different schemes of reconciliation, and so
> forth.
> 
> ---
> A. Soroka
> The University of Virginia Library
> 
> On Jul 31, 2014, at 9:02 PM, Karen Coyle <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> 
> > 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

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