On 5/22/13 8:02 AM, Eric Miller wrote:
[log in to unmask]" type="cite">

      
The 'grouping' mechanism serves two (at least?) purposes. One as a mechanism for explanation ('Authority' vs trying to enumerate each example). The other is to support extensibility in a consistent, actionable manner. Stuart has listed some of these Authorities (Person, Topic, Organisation, Place, etc.) If one broadens the scope of BIBFRAME even slightly to support our traditional needs we start to see more.  A 'nearby' example would be the management of technical and product documentation across an huge, international organizations. In this case, the needs include refinement to Organisation, inclusion of Departments, etc. Once one moves beyond even these 'nearby' examples, the applications and use cases get even more interesting. Rather than say BIBFRAME should be everything to everyone and define everything (which it can't be), adding these extensibility mechanisms allows BIBFRAME to be used in a range of larger contexts and support even more of a free flow of data across d
 escriptiv
e communities. 

Here's the description from section 2.1 of the BIBFRAME authorities document:

" It is anticipated that the BIBFRAME Authority - the lightweight Abstraction Layer itself - would be identified with a URI of the domain creating the resource.  In this way, it would function as a local access point (HTTP URI) for the person or concept.  The lightweight Abstraction Layer (the BIBFRAME Authority), however, need not link to a traditional authority resource, which is especially important since there may be no traditional authority resource to link to (not all names and subjects found in current bibliographic data have corresponding authority records)."

From a previous paragraph, it appears that the resource in "creating the resource" is the bibliographic "thing" that is being described. So tell me if this is correct:

- 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

That is, does the original BIBFRAME authority identity get re-used? Can the Work identity also get re-used? (This is more a "best practice" question than a "what is technically possible" question.)

Then I assume that at some later date Stanford does original cataloging for another Work by PersonA, and would create:

SU:Work9 -> author -> SU:Person12
SU:Person12 -> label -> "some name here"
SU:Person12 -> authority -> lcna:PersonA

I have some other questions, but I'm going to stop here and see if this is correct before I go on.

kc

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

--
Eric Miller
President, Zepheira "The Art of Data"
http://zepheira.com/ tel:+1.617.395.0229

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