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  September 2014

BIBFRAME September 2014

Subject:

Re: Medium of performance (Music) question

From:

"Trail, Nate" <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

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

Date:

Thu, 4 Sep 2014 11:37:44 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (61 lines)

In addition to bf:musicMediumNote, there is  bf:musicMedium that is not string based, so it could be used to link to resources like http://id.loc.gov/authorities/performanceMediums/mp2013015507.rdf or other sources, in born BIBFRAME cataloging. I'm checking to see how it could be used with 048 transformation.

For lots of these types of entries, the MARC data, when not easily parseable, needs to be in a string based/note type property until someone/thing can come along and extract out the resources referenced in those notes, and put them in the uri version of that property.  But for born BF, they can go right into the uri version of the property.

Nate

-----------------------------------------
Nate Trail
LS/TECH/NDMSO
LA308, Mail Stop 4402
Library of Congress
Washington DC 20540



-----Original Message-----
From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Karen Coyle
Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2014 11:26 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [BIBFRAME] Medium of performance (Music) question

Kirk-Evan,

I thought it would be interesting to see what RDA does with medium of performance, and it appears to have single field, P20215, that would correspond to the 382. It also does not seem to have anything corresponding to the 048. (I don't know of an "official" mapping from MARC to RDA. Anyone?) A slightly reduced turtle form is:

<http://rdaregistry.info/Elements/e/P20215>
     reg:name "mediumOfPerformanceOfMusicalContent"@en ;
     a rdf:Property ;
     rdfs:domain <http://rdaregistry.info/Elements/c/C10006> ;
     rdfs:isDefinedBy <http://rdaregistry.info/Elements/e/> ;
     rdfs:label "has medium of performance of musical content"@en ;
     skos:definition "Relates an expression to the instrument, instruments, voice, voices, etc., used (or intended to be used) for performance of musical content."@en .

The RDA vocabulary is not at the same level of detail as MARC, nor is it at the same level of detail of the RDA rules. (Which I do not have access to, so perhaps someone else can check that that is verifiably
true.) In fact, I would say that RDA is specified at about the ISBD level. BIBFRAME is an even more "macro" view. RDA has about 1400 elements, BIBFRAME has 104. Either can, however, be expanded.

There is work going on in RDA to define more specific elements for the "extent" area (e.g. making "23 cm" a separate numeric + unitOfMeasure). 
Clearly, the same would need to be done for musical instruments (and perhaps many dozens of other data elements.

There are various ways this could happen. One is that RDA and BIBFRAME could swell up to many many thousands of different classes and properties. Another is that a version (profile) of either or both could be developed for music materials. This would allow general libraries that are content to have a display form of the medium of performance could use the RDA or BIBFRAME property, while music libraries, especially those serving schools of music, could use the "full music extension" of either vocabulary. That way, we don't force that level of detail on libraries and users that have no use for it.

I always see music as a special case, with its structured uniform titles and massive aggregation problem. I think that a profile for music libraries would be a very interesting development. (I'd be happy to put in what I can on that.)

kc
p.s. There are LOTS of other special cases: maps, photographs, archival 
materials.... all could use this kind of treatment.

On 9/3/14, 7:52 PM, Kirk-Evan Billet wrote:
> Thank you all for the helpful responses to this question.
>
> But to continue, I am rather perplexed at learning that MARC bib 382 is being mapped to a note field. Since the LCMPT (Library of Congress Medium of Performance Thesaurus) has recently been released as linked data, why would we want to be so "string-y" about medium of performance in Bibframe? Also, I have noticed that, in current transformations, MARC bib 048 (the "traditional" place for coding instrumentation before upstart 382 came along) is not being mapped at all. (Of course, some kind of programmatic conversion from 048 to 382 may be in our future.) Moreover, I want to be thinking also about new data we may soon begin to generate, outside of transforming what we already have. This aspect of music resources is crucial.
>
> Best day,
> Kirk-Evan Billet

-- 
Karen Coyle
[log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net
m: +1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600

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

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