On 5/24/13 1:01 PM, Ford, Kevin wrote:
[log in to unmask]" type="cite">
I do think that BIBFRAME should have a way to keep together an external
authority identifier and the local display forms.
-- I don't know if I understand your point correctly, but, to me, the BIBFRAME Authority as a lightweight abstraction layer meets this need quite nicely.  It is a resource that provides a means to store local display forms and link to an external authority.

I'm beginning to wonder what we mean by "local". I think that I fall into thinking about local systems and what they will have, but that is an assumption about the future that may not prevail. I earlier asked about the re-use of BIBFRAME authorities, using the example below. The primary question is: does each library holding an item mint a new URI for an authority? In other words, do the 6,000+ libraries that hold a copy of Harry Potter #1 each have a separate "local" URI for J K Rowling?

Here's the example I gave:

- There is an LCNA identifier and description for PersonA, call it 
lcna:PersonA
- Harvard catalogs a book by that author (original cataloging). Harvard 
creates a BIBFRAME Work description and a BIBFRAME Authority, using the 
Harvard domain (call it HU). We now have:

HU:Work9 -> author -> HU:PersonF
HU:PersonF -> label -> "some name here"
HU:PersonF -> authority -> lcna:PersonA

Later, Stanford uses the HU data for copy cataloging. Does Stanford now 
have:

HU:Work9 -> author -> HU:PersonF
HU:PersonF -> label -> "some name here"
HU:PersonF -> authority -> lcna:PersonA

Or does Stanford have:

SU:WorkSu7 -> author -> SU:PersonAbc
SU:PersonAbc -> label -> "some name here"
SU:PersonAbc -> authority -> lcna:PersonA


That is, does the original BIBFRAME authority identity get re-used, or does copy cataloging result in the minting of new URIs for each entity?  (This is more a "best practice" question than a "what is technically possible" question.)

Then if at some later date Stanford does original cataloging for another Work by PersonA, and would it create:

SU:WorkSu56 -> author -> SU:Person12
SU:Person12 -> label -> "some name here"
SU:Person12 -> authority -> lcna:PersonA

Or would Stanford re-use its own URI for that person?

SU:WorkSu56 -> author -> SU:PersonAbc
SU:Person12 -> label -> "some name here"
SU:Person12 -> authority -> lcna:PersonA

Obviously, I'm not asking what *will* happen, I'm asking what we think *should* happen. And to me this is mixed in with the question of "local" and what "local" means.

kc

[log in to unmask]" type="cite">

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).
-- As you surmise, ideally "national and other shared authority files would link to each other" and one could just follow the links.  But there may also be times when someone finds a source of information about a Person that may not be available via one of the links of an authority file.  So, for example (and this is off the top of my head), perhaps a German library uses the GND for its authority control for the form of a name, but then finds an alternate source for more detailed information about the Person (that is not linked to from the GND or VIAF).  That library could then link its BIBFRAME Authority resource for that Person to this additional source in order to include information from that source in its display.  

Cordially,
Kevin


-----Original Message-----
From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Karen Coyle
Sent: Friday, May 24, 2013 2:28 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [BIBFRAME] Authorities: updating


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.

kc


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)
. JSON (MADS/RDF and SKOS/RDF)
. MADS - RDF/XML
. MADS - N-Triples
. MADS/RDF - JSON
. 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">
      <label>
            IFLA  Study Group on the Functional Requirements for
Bibliographic
            Records
      </label>
      <link>http://www.ifla.org/</link>
      <hasIDLink
resource="http://id.loc.gov/authorities/names/nr98013265" />
      <hasVIAFLink resource="http://viaf.org/viaf/148620313" />
      <hasDNBLink resource="http://d-nb.info/gnd/2167628-8" />
</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: http://kcoyle.blogspot.com/2013/05/bibframe-authorities.html (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] http://kcoyle.net
ph: 1-510-540-7596
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet


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

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