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: [Radical] Transcribed and Controlled Data - as a process

From:

Karen Coyle <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

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

Date:

Tue, 5 Aug 2014 09:42:17 -0700

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (91 lines)

Another thought on this:

We should consider that the transition from 19th century style library 
cataloging to [whatever the future will bring] could be incremental. A 
solution like HTML+RDFa is a single step in a multi-step process. 
Knowing that more steps will take place means that we don't have to 
solve all of the problems today.

OCLC's use of schema.org does not attempt to translate the entire 
bibliographic record to RDF. It picks the low-hanging fruit (controlled 
headings, some, but not all, identifiers) and makes them available for 
linking. It essentially extracts what it can from MARC to RDFa. 
Eventually, the balance between text and actionable data could shift, 
but it doesn't have to do so all at once.

Could BIBFRAME take a similar approach? I'm not sure what it would look 
like, but if I can wax metaphorically, I see something like the egg with 
a chick and a yolk. As the chick grows, the yolk is consumed and grows 
smaller.

Alternatively, this could all mean that I haven't had my breakfast yet. ;-)

kc

On 8/1/14, 9:18 AM, Robert Sanderson wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
> In my experience, RDF and Linked Data can do both presentation based 
> information (eg here is content to present directly to the user, 
> without semantics eg [1]) and it can do semantic, descriptive 
> information (here is a rich description of the resource, say a book or 
> annotation eg [2]) but both at once is very challenging without simply 
> repeating everything in a for-machines way and a for-humans way as per 
> the current titleStatement, providerStatement, and one assumes 
> authorStatement, subjectStatement, etc.
>
> Here are two radical ideas, for which the boat has probably long since 
> sailed, but I'll throw them out there regardless.
>
> 1. Don't try to mix them up.  Have two completely separate 
> descriptions, where one is intended for humans to read, and the other 
> is intended for machines to reason upon and search.  A machine will 
> only ever throw a transcribed string through to the user, so make it 
> easy for them to do that by separating the non-semantic information 
> from the semantic information, with links between them.
>
> 2.  Mix them up using the appropriate technology: HTML + RDFA. 
>  Instead of thinking about triples for everything, instead create the 
> HTML that you want the user to see.  Then annotate that HTML with RDFA 
> properties to add the semantics into the record (and really a record 
> now, not a graph).  This way there's only one record to maintain that 
> has both, but uses presentation technology for presenting things to 
> users, and semantic technology for enabling machines to understand the 
> information.
>
> Basically -- use the right tools for the job.  RDF has a hard time 
> representing transcriptions outside of non-semantic strings because it 
> was never intended to do that.  Order in RDF is a complete pain, 
> because a graph is inherently unordered, but there are very real use 
> cases that require order.  On the other hand, RDF is fantastic for 
> controlled data as that is precisely its intended usage.  We should 
> make the most appropriate use of the tools that we have available to 
> us, rather than treating everything as a nail.
>
> Best,
>
> Rob
>
> [1].  The IIIF Presentation API is focused on this approach of giving 
> information intended for a client to display, while still being useful 
> linked data by referencing existing semantic descriptions and 
> following REST and JSON-LD. http://iiif.io/api/presentation/2.0/
> [2].  The Open Annotation work is a rich data model that provides 
> semantics for web annotation, but says almost nothing about 
> presentation. http://www.openannotation.org/spec/core/
>
>
>
> -- 
> Rob Sanderson
> Technology Collaboration Facilitator
> Digital Library Systems and Services
> Stanford, CA 94305

-- 
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