Print

Print


Shlomo,

You weren't satisfied with the explanation given as to why this is not the
case?

Rob


On Sun, May 5, 2013 at 10:18 AM, Shlomo Sanders <
[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>  Hear, hear****
>
> ** **
>
> Thanks,****
>
> Shlomo****
>
> ** **
>
> Experience the all-new, singing and dancing interactive Primo brochure<http://www.exlibrispublications.com/primo/>
> ****
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum [mailto:
> [log in to unmask]] *On Behalf Of *Young,Jeff (OR)
> *Sent:* Saturday, May 04, 2013 06:27
> *To:* [log in to unmask]
> *Subject:* Re: [BIBFRAME] Documents and improvements****
>
> ** **
>
> As Karen Coyle suggested (if I skimmed her recent comments correctly),
> what if you guys can't agree because you're both merely reinventing RDF
> graphs?****
>
> ** **
>
> Jeff
>
> Sent from my iPad****
>
>
> On May 3, 2013, at 4:16 PM, "Robert Sanderson" <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:****
>
>   ** **
>
> Dear Sally, Ray and all,
>
> As co-chairs and co-editors of the W3C Open Annotation Community Group,
> Paolo, Herbert and I would again like to invite members of the BIBFRAME
> group to continue the discussion of interoperable annotation on the mailing
> list for the W3C Community Group. There is neither a cost nor membership
> requirement to joining.
>
> We feel it is fair to say that the Open Annotation effort has gained
> significant momentum, being the 6th largest community group with many
> active and ongoing discussions. However there is always room for
> improvement, and we still believe that both BIBFRAME and Open Annotation
> would benefit from an open discussion of the issues that resulted in the
> divergence which is clear in the annotation document.
>
> It is regrettable that the BIBFRAME annotation model is neither compatible
> nor interoperable with the Open Annotation Data Model, especially given the
> significant overlap between the target communities of Open Annotation and
> BIBFRAME.  We are disappointed that prior efforts to engage with the
> BIBFRAME community regarding annotation did not yield more constructive
> results to this stage. We hope that our invitation to discuss issues on the
> W3C Community Group will be met positively as we feel we owe it to our
> communities to work towards convergence.
>
> Respectfully,
>
> Robert Sanderson, Paolo Ciccarese, and Herbert Van de Sompel
>
>
>
> On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 12:08 AM, McCallum, Sally <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks to all for your comments and ideas over the last few months.  The
> small team that we have called the Early Experimenters has prepared some
> discussion papers on difficult topics related to the BIBFRAME model and the
> developing draft vocabulary.  Now we want to put these papers on
> bibframe.org and begin discussion on this listserv.   By preparing
> background and recommendation papers we hope to help focus the discussion
> on the issues.
> >
> >
> >
> > The issues are some of the hard ones that all of us who deal with
> bibliographic data run into  -- always.   We are starting with the BIBFRAME
> Annotations paper, which you can find here:
> >
> >                 http://bibframe.org/documentation/annotations
> >
> > Then we hope to get discussion papers on BIBFRAME Authorities,
> Relationships, Schema.org, and Resource types out soon, followed by
> Holdings, Aggregates, and other issues.   These were prepared by various
> subgroups of the Experimenter team.  We do not want to send everything at
> once as we would like you to have focus rather than overload.
> >
> >
> >
> > We ask that when discussing the topics, you name your listserv comment
> with the topic short title (indicated on the topic paper) with an extra
> title to bind threads, e.g., "annotations--main point".
> >
> >
> >
> > We at LC continue to work on the conversion of MARC data, which, along
> with RDA, is the current feeder of the current vocabulary available at
> http://bibframe.org/.  In the last couple of months, we have made the
> following enhancements to the BIBFRAME website:
> >
> >
> >
> > -  Regularly updated to the vocabulary: http://bibframe.org/vocab/
> >
> > -  Added BIBFRAME example snippets in vocabulary section: e.g.
> http://bibframe.org/vocab/class-lcc
> >
> > -  Improved the MARC-to-BIBFRAME code: http://bibframe.org/tools/
> >
> > -  Added a set of Frequently Asked Questions: http://bibframe.org/faq/
> >
> >
> >
> > We have made every effort to update the MARC-to-BIBFRAME transformation
> code after modifying the vocabulary, and we plan to change and enhance the
> code based on feedback from the papers.  You can begin using the
> transformation code today as a reference and starting point for your own
> explorations.  See the contribute page to learn more:
> http://bibframe.org/contribute/.
> >
> >
> >
> > Please read the papers that we are be putting up on bibframe.org and
> participate in the discussion -- we are all in this together!
> >
> >
> >
> > Sally
> >
> >
> >
> > **************************
> >
> > Sally H. McCallum
> >
> > Chief, Network Development and Standards Office
> >
> > Library of Congress,  101 Independence Ave., SE
> >
> > Washington, DC 20540  USA
> >
> > [log in to unmask]
> >
> > Tel. 1-202-707-5119 -- Fax 1-202-707-0115
> >
> > **************************
> >
> >  ****
>
>