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:

Monospaced Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

BIBFRAME Home

BIBFRAME Home

BIBFRAME  April 2015

BIBFRAME April 2015

Subject:

Re: How is Bibframe data stored?

From:

Martynas Jusevičius <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

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

Date:

Sat, 11 Apr 2015 09:55:00 +0300

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (108 lines)

Brian,

it is tempting to view RDF and RDBMS as alteratives just because they
both are data models. But they really are not, because only RDF has
some properties that turn out to be extremely helpful for data
de-siloification and integration on a global scale.

Let me outline a few of the features from one of my GitHub posts:
- explicit global identifiers (URIs) allow linking databases at an
unprecedented level of granularity. In RDBMS terms, think about a
universal way to make foreign keys to remote datasources -- that's
URI.
- databases are schema-less and effortless to merge. Lets say 2
institutions manage a list of world countries but each with a
different (and large) set of indicators. Now if they are merging, or a
customer has data from both, even if a lot it is duplicated, like
country names and codes, the differences in table schemas can make the
merge of these datasources a non-trivial effort, likely requiring
programming. Merging RDF is instead simple concatenation.
- canonical data model. You can map incompatible formats to an RDF
representation and use it as a bridge in a pivotal (indirect) data
conversion.

There are more, but you can find the whole post here:
https://github.com/Graphity/graphity-client/wiki/Reinventing-Web-applications

Thinking about a data model or format, it is also important whether
it's an international standard, and what is the size and quality of
its software infrastructure. That is why XML and RDF blow YAML out of
the water.

Getting used to RDF takes some experience, but it is rewarding and I
would say feels much more natural afterwards. If you say you get
JSON-LD, you should be able to get RDF, because that is just one of
its serializations.

Martynas
graphityhq.com

On Sat, Apr 11, 2015 at 9:01 AM, Brian Tingle <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> I've been following the interesting discussion on this list, and I'd like to
> share a thought I had about this topic, that I hope will be productive to
> the conversation.
>
> We all heard the rallying cry of "MARC must die" and now we hear "BIBFRAME,
> is the new MARC (but now it is not just for libraries)". I support the
> overall "linked data movement" but I'm just not really into the all this RDF
> and SPARQL stuff -- but I do think the data modeling going on here is going
> to pay off by enabling better interoperability and data sharing -- I just
> don't see anything fundamentally different than other data model systems or
> query technologies. And I just can't hold a triple graph in my head, all
> the arrows, and then httprange-14 blows out my suspension of disbelief. I
> don't know if it is like one of those pictures if you cross your eyes or
> whatever and you see it in 3d? I can't see those 3d pictures, and I can't
> old a graph of triples in my head.
>
> I'm not saying there is not a time and a place to store stuff in a triple
> store with a SPARQL endpoint (or use a Linked Data Platform), I just don't
> see why it needs to be the one true way™.
>
> Some people like beer, some people like wine. Some people like RDF, some
> people like RDBMS. Just because we don't have the same tastes does not mean
> we can't have a data party together. Let's embrace technodiversity.
>
> I do really like JSON-LD. http://json-ld.org
> I can understand that. It can package a graph of triples for me into
> something that looks like a record. It supports CURIEs/xmlns in a way that
> does not have so much of a smell to me.
>
> JSON is nice for programmers, at least web hacks like me, but it is not
> necessarily the best format for human editing. For example, no comments
> allowed.
> http://json.org
>
> YAML is a superset of JSON with "human readability" as a design goal
> http://yaml.org
> http://www.yaml.org/spec/1.2/spec.html#id2759572
>
> Well, you can do YAML that will convert / is compatible with JSON-LD
> "@context" and "@id"
> http://wiki.cfcl.com/Projects/Arborescence/YAML-LD
>
> So, the thought I had was what if you had a LD aware YAML editor /
> Cataloging IDE -- maybe implemented with a web based IDE framework or an
> eclipse or emacs plugin -- that would parse your YAML-LD "@context" and
> automatically hook up autocomplete drop downs against the
> vocabularies/ontologies/whatever they are. CURIEs will be filled in
> according to how you had your @context set up. Domains would be used to
> limit your autocomplete to appropriate values. Cataloging rules could be
> displayed in the IDE. The editor would check validity and have syntax
> highlighting.
>
> YAML also supports multiple records per file, so for batch processing use
> cases, it might be sort of similar to MARC, where I will often get single
> files with thousands of records. If you want to put the batch of records in
> a triple store or a solr index -- data party people don't care.
>
> Anyway, that was my thought -- consider storing it as YAML records that
> follow JSON-LD rules.
>
> Have a nice day and link away.
>
> -- Brian
>
>
>

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

August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
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