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  March 2015

BIBFRAME March 2015

Subject:

Re: 2-tier BIBFRAME

From:

Jared Cowing <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

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

Date:

Mon, 9 Mar 2015 13:34:04 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (51 lines)

For me, this discussion has been great to follow- clearly there are numerous
visions about what Bibframe will be/should do in the technology and
cataloging communities. I think it's really important to have these
discussions that help get us all closer to being on the same page, and
they're very much worth the frustration.

My first introduction to Bibframe was this now-ubiquitous image:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/84/BIBFRAME_model.png

From other catalogers who also saw this image, I heard that Bibframe would
help RDA realize its full potential by breaking out of not just MARC's
format aspects but also the content model it enforced of bib record, item
record, authority record. In theory, so I understood, it could allow for a
more FRBR-ized model where you could have work records (Alice in
Wonderland), under which would be linked expression/manifestation records
(audio book, Bantam paperback, Sterling hardcover, maybe film/theater
adaptations depending on how broad the definition of 'work' is), and under
those would be linked the item/instance records. This ability to be able to
search for/organize by FRBR 'works' and then drill down from there would
bring huge advantages for fields like music, film, literature. Sites like
Amazon already do a rudimentary version of this when they let you choose
editions from one 'work' page, and I know most people looking for film
information prefer to look at the 'work'-based IMBD over Amazon/library
catalogs, because they don't have to wade through heaps of records for
different manifestations/expressions of the same film (besides the fact that
IMDB is just way more comprehensive).

More recent updates on Bibframe lead me to understand that the 'work'
concept in Bibframe is closer to our current concept of a bib record. Am I
off the mark in that understanding? If cost/backwards compatibility is the
reason behind this, that's hard to argue against. Nevertheless, what I seem
to be watching reflects the 2-tier idea mentioned. The vision behind the
backwards-compatible tier is (correct me if wrong) focused on linked data in
order to make data easier to exchange with outside communities, and the
other, somewhat less backwards compatible tier comes out of the idea of
using linked data to fully realize the FRBR model. What I'm seeing is that
both 'tiers' share in common the idea of making what is currently MARC data
easier to tease out/index/manipulate (like getting a list of all held books
that were published locally, as was brought up).

It might be that this whole message is a re-statement of the obvious for
everyone involved, but I wanted to make sure I was oriented correctly in
understanding where this discussion is sitting right now. I also thought
chiming in might be helpful since the more FRBR-focused visions of Bibframe
are mostly mentioned on cataloging listservs rather than on this one, and
wanted to see what the sentiment about FRBR/RDA was on this list.

Jared Cowing
Cataloging & Metadata Specialist
California State University, Northridge

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

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