On 5/24/13 6:52 AM, Trail, Nate wrote:
> As far as "where is the link for updates", I think it would probably 
> not be the same link, since so many flavors of update would need to be 
> handled. A system would need to know how to interpret the link and get 
> to the flavor of update it wants (JSON serialization of the full info, 
> rdfxml of just the label, etc).

that makes sense, Nate. And therefore it is possible that the update 
link may be different from the more general "authority" link. And 
presumably this is another area where versioning will be important -- 
e.g. if you don't update your system from "cookery" to "cooking", that 
wouldn't be so much an error as an earlier version.

I do think that BIBFRAME should have a way to keep together an external 
authority identifier and the local display forms. I'm still not sure 
when it makes sense to link from the local BIBFRAME "authority" and 
other external authorities (VIAF, or national libraries in other 
countries). I'm not against it, I'm just not coming up with a use case 
at the moment. In general, I would assume that national and other shared 
authority files would like to each other as a matter of course.


> Each authority would have to maintain an API for such updates.  That 
> said, the ID link, with content negotiation, is actually a good step 
> in that direction, since you can get all these formats of the record 
> right there:
> *Alternate Formats*
>   * RDF/XML (MADS and SKOS)
>     <>
>   * N-Triples (MADS and SKOS)
>     <>
>     <>
>   * MADS - RDF/XML
>     <>
>   * MADS - N-Triples
>     <>
>     <>
>   * SKOS - RDF/XML
>     <>
>   * SKOS - N-Triples
>     <>
>   * SKOS - JSON <>
>   * MADS/XML <>
>   * MARC/XML <>
> We do not, of course, have a push service that tracks change dates (yet).
> Nate
> *From:*Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum 
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] *On Behalf Of *Karen Coyle
> *Sent:* Thursday, May 23, 2013 6:34 PM
> *To:* [log in to unmask]
> *Subject:* [BIBFRAME] Authorities: updating
> Here is the example of a BIBFRAME Authority from the Authorities document:
> <*Organization*  id="http://bibframe/auth/org/ifla"  <http://bibframe/auth/org/ifla>>
>        <label>
>              IFLA  Study Group on the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic
>              Records
>        </label>
>        <link></link>
>        <hasIDLink resource=""  <>  />
>        <hasVIAFLink resource=""  <>  />
>        <hasDNBLink resource=""  <>  />
> </*Organization*>
> I still haven't an answer from an earlier question (now lost in all of 
> this email) as to whether there will be a specific link from the 
> BIBFRAME Authority to the actual shared authority file used by the 
> library - that is, the file from which the library derives what here 
> is shown as the "<label>". The example above shows links to LCNA, DNB 
> and VIAF, but it isn't clear if any one of those is singled out as the 
> authority being used by the library. Why does this matter? It matters 
> because if the library intends to be part of an authority community, 
> they have to be able to receive updates from the shared authority 
> file, and therefore there must be a link between the shared authority 
> file and the local usage of a term. I illustrate this in the diagrams 
> I did at: 
> (see esp. 2nd diagram).
> If there isn't such a link then I do not see how libraries will be 
> able to keep their names in sync with the authority file to which they 
> adhere.
> We also haven't talked about alternate names. The examples show a 
> single name form. Indexing requires alternates. Both single names and 
> alternates often comes from a shared authority file (that isn't local) 
> and both types of name forms can change. What is the link that makes 
> change management work with the BIBFRAME Authorities?
> kc
> -- 
> Karen Coyle
> [log in to unmask]  <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> ph: 1-510-540-7596
> m: 1-510-435-8234
> skype: kcoylenet

Karen Coyle
[log in to unmask]
ph: 1-510-540-7596
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet