Print

Print


Dear Stuart,

I suspect what follows will be mostly unsatisfying.  The short is: on the whole, there's a lot of work to be done to address the type of general relations/specifity you are asking about.  In large part this is because your examples bring us very close to the "aggregates" issue.

I want to try to answer some of your questions, but I want to start with the last one, because it is so easy.  As for the following answers, they are hugely dependent on my understanding the question in the first place, and I felt those were a little unclear at times.

> (e) why does the definition from page 10 of the report not appear
> on http://bibframe.org/vocab/Instance.html Has the definition changed?
-- It's not different.  In fact, the definition at bibframe.org is virtually a word-for-word copy from the document.  It is, however, truncated to only the absolute essence at bibframe.org.  As we continue to update the vocabulary, we'll likely add more complete and encompassing definitions.

> (a) what is the status in the bibframe model
> of http://archive.ifla.org/VII/s13/frbr/frbr_current3.htm ?
-- The conceptual notion of the "Final report" would be a BIBFRAME Work (with IFLA as the creator).  This page - http://archive.ifla.org/VII/s13/frbr/frbr_current_toc.htm - which is basically the landing page for the *entire* report would be an Instance of that Work.  However, the page you direct to in your question is not the same as the link I provided.  Your link is to a distinct chapter of that Work.  One option for the model would be to create a BIBFRAME Work resource for the chapter, which, being a BIBFRAME Work, would have an Instance (represented by your link).  There would be a defined relationship between the BIBFRAME Work for the entire report to the BIBFRAME Work for Chapter 3.  We've been experimenting with this idea.  

> (b) what is the status in the bibframe model
> of http://archive.ifla.org/VII/s13/frbr/fig3-1.jpg ?
-- Personally, I think this could be more granular a level of cataloging than we'll be feasible for most (time and money), but it could be treated in the same fashion.  The image could be a BIBFRAME Work (with its own Instance) and be associated with a Work resource of the chapter it is from. 

> (c) shouldn't the HTML Instance be defined as
> the http://bibframe.org/vocab/unionOf all the HTML pages that make up
> the HTML version of the report plus all their page dependencies (css,
> images, media files, etc)?
-- unionOf, though lacking a definition at bibframe.org, comes from a pre-defined relationship in MARC used mainly (if not exclusively) for serials.  It is too early to tell whether it has such a narrow use in the future, but it is meant to capture the notion that "This Work is the product of a merger of these two other Works."  I believe what you are trying to do is something completely different.  And, FWIW, the attempt to sensibly record how all the parts of an HTML document logically fit together is not something we're focused on.

Cordially,
Kevin


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Stuart Yeates
> Sent: Saturday, May 11, 2013 7:31 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [BIBFRAME] Experimenting with BIBFRAME?
> 
> OK, I'll bite
> 
> I'm currently working to encode some of the texts I'm responsible for
> on the http://nzetc.victoria.ac.nz/ site. These are digitised
> historical texts published as sets of webpages. I'm currently
> struggling with the Work / Instance relationship, the issue I'm
> struggling with is actually duplicated exactly in the Primer
> at: http://www.loc.gov/bibframe/pdf/marcld-report-11-21-2012.pdf I'll
> go with the primer example, since it's better known.
> 
> An Instance is defined on page 10 as:
> 
> "BIBFRAME Instances reflect an individual, material embodiment of a
> BIBFRAME Work that can be physical or digital in nature. A BIBFRAME
> Instance exists as a Web based control point that includes properties
> specific to the materialization as well as contextual relationships to
> appropriate BIBFRAME Authorities related to the publication, production,
> distribution of the material resource. Each BIBFRAME Instance is an
> instance of one and only one BIBFRAME Work."
> 
> The figure on page 19 has three instances, a phyical, a PDF and an HTML,
> the HTML being identified
> as http://archive.ifla.org/VII/s13/frbr/frbr_current_toc.htm
> 
> The conceptualisation issue I have seems to be expressable via the
> questions:
> 
> (a) what is the status in the bibframe model
> of http://archive.ifla.org/VII/s13/frbr/frbr_current3.htm ?
> 
> (b) what is the status in the bibframe model
> of http://archive.ifla.org/VII/s13/frbr/fig3-1.jpg ?
> 
> (c) shouldn't the HTML Instance be defined as
> the http://bibframe.org/vocab/unionOf all the HTML pages that make up
> the HTML version of the report plus all their page dependencies (css,
> images, media files, etc)?
> 
> (d) if an instance corresponds to only one Work, in the case of
> composite Works which are subsequently split into HTML along the lines
> of the original Works, do the HTML pages correspond to the original or
> composite Work?
> 
> (e) why does the definition from page 10 of the report not appear
> on http://bibframe.org/vocab/Instance.html Has the definition changed?
> 
> cheers
> stuart