Print

Print


Dear Stephen,

> Will it be possible to use a BIBFRAME authority to link a BIBFRAME Work
> describing a FRBR Work to a BIBFRAME Work description of a FRBR
> Expression?
-- I think - think - you are refering to title and name/title authorities (my assumption is also based on your next sentence).  If that is correct, in our experimentation, we've been treating title and name/title authorities as BIBFRAME Works, not as BIBFRAME Authorities.  We create a direct link between two BIBFRAME Works in this case, one which might be the FRBR Work and the other the FRBR Expression.  As you presented it now, I would expect direct links between BIBFRAME Works to associate FRBR Work and FRBR Expression resources without recourse to a BIBFRAME Authority.  Now, if I haven't understood the issue, can you please try again?


> "Stand alone" is a complex concept in webbed environment. Can we say
> that a description "stands alone" if a comparable static description
> can be harvested from the webbed description including the things it
> links to (e.g., BIBFRAME Authorities)?
-- Fair enough.  I oversimplified. 

Naturally, for example, there would like be links pointing to URIs for BIBFRAME Authority resources for people, such as creators, translators, etc, involved in the creation of a Work.  One would have to follow the link to learn what those URIs mean and that's not quite "standalone."  What I was refering to was the idea that the BIBFRAME Work representing the FRBR Expression would actually include a reference to the Work's creator (in addition to and not just its translator) and it would include the Work's "formal" title, all without having to follow a relationship to a separate BIBFRAME Work.  I don't know if that offers sufficient clarification.  Again, we're still seeing where the data goes before settling on a best practice.

Yours,
Kevin





> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Stephen Hearn
> Sent: Friday, May 24, 2013 12:01 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [BIBFRAME] Holds and ILL with Bibframe
> 
> [The following uses the "BIBFRAME Authority" name, but we really do
> need a better term for these. Maybe "inclusive links" or "capture/cache
> connectors" would work, to convey the idea that the BIBFRAME authority
> is a linking structure that can capture information from an external
> source and include it, manually or algorithmically, in the indexable,
> displayable description of a BIBFRAME Work or Instance. Anyway, that's
> how I'm understanding BIBFRAME Authorities now.]
> 
> If BIBFRAME Authorities are able to carry the weight of added access
> and description for a given BIBFRAME Work or Instance, that opens up an
> interesting set of possibilities. Traditional authorities will be
> sources of alternate names and presumably other information which can
> be captured and cached on the BF Authority for local context indexing
> and display in relation to one or many BIBFRAME Works and Instances.
> 
> Will it be possible to use a BIBFRAME authority to link a BIBFRAME Work
> describing a FRBR Work to a BIBFRAME Work description of a FRBR
> Expression? Something similar could be done if traditional uniform
> title authorities were remodeled to include the full range of FRBR Work
> attributes and components, but that would be up to other agents, not
> BIBFRAME. Personally, I'd be happy to see BIBFRAME include a model for
> a generalized set of elements and relationships true for the FRBR Work
> as a type of BIBFRAME Work. The goal would be to capture and cache
> those bits of access and description specific to the FRBR Work and
> include them as data for all the BIBFRAME Works describing Expressions
> of the FRBR Work through the use of BIBFRAME Authorities. This should
> be a close parallel to using BIBFRAME Authorities to capture and cache
> for local use bits of information about named entities which reside in
> traditional authorities.
> 
> "Stand alone" is a complex concept in webbed environment. Can we say
> that a description "stands alone" if a comparable static description
> can be harvested from the webbed description including the things it
> links to (e.g., BIBFRAME Authorities)? If so, and if the link to
> BIBFRAME/FRBR Work descriptions can be included as targets of the
> BIBFRAME Authority relationship rather than as simple related record
> links, then I think we could have the division of descriptive labor
> which FRBR envisioned without sacrificing the ability to assemble and
> communicate "stand alone" descriptions of Expressions/Manifestations or
> Works/Instances, or requiring a major reconceptualization of BIBFRAME,
> or requiring an overhaul of MARC its twilight years.
> 
> Stephen
> 
> On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 9:51 AM, Ford, Kevin <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Dear Stephen,
> 
> Frankly, we've not really addressed this (though we're aware of the
> idea of inheritance in this sense).  It's not the we won't, it's more
> to do with seeing where the data goes and what is practical.
> 
> The nice thing - as I see it - about BIBFRAME Works that double as
> RDA/FRBR Expressions is that, when the information is repeated, the
> BIBFRAME Work can stand alone without reference to another BIBFRAME
> Work (what would be the RDA/FRBR Expression).  Mind you - it's not that
> there is no link to a BIBFRAME Work that is representative of an
> RDA/FRBR Work (there is), it's just that you do not also need that
> other BIBFRAME Work to make sense of the one that is representative of
> the RDA/FRBR Expression.
> 
> Yours,
> Kevin
> 
> 
> 
> From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Stephen Hearn
> Sent: Friday, May 24, 2013 10:09 AM
> 
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [BIBFRAME] Holds and ILL with Bibframe
> 
> There was an idea in FRBR that elements of description could cascade
> down the WEMI structure--things specific the Work (e.g., date of
> creation, form, context, relationships to creators, relationships to
> Work-level subject terms and classification) could be done once for the
> Work description and linked to from descriptions of Expressions of that
> Work; things specific to an Expression (e.g., relationships to
> translators, date of translation, language, relationships to
> Expression-level subjects) could be done once for the Expression
> description and linked to from descriptions of Manifestations of that
> Expression, and so on. Does BIBFRAME have a way to do this? or does
> collapsing the FRBR Work and Expression entities into the BF Work mean
> that the FRBR Work-specific elements must be repeated (and maintained)
> in each BF Work description (i.e., for each FRBR Expression)?
> 
> On Fri, May 24, 2013 at 8:58 AM, Trail, Nate <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> The bf:Work does not contain the FRBR:Expression, it links to it. The
> FRBR:Expression is another BF:Work with a few extra properties like
> language that make it a FRBR:Expression.
> 
> 
> From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Karen Coyle
> Sent: Friday, May 24, 2013 9:42 AM
> 
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [BIBFRAME] Holds and ILL with Bibframe
> 
> If a BIBFRAME Work can have an Expression, where is that Expression? To
> "have" it, the Expression needs to have a separate URI, which means
> that it has to be a "thing" -- it has to be its own circle in the
> diagram. But there is no Expression circle in the diagram.
> 
> I had understood that the FRBR-type elements for Work and Expression
> were both to be entered into the BIBFRAME Work, and the examples seem
> to show that. I'm going to assume that "hasExpression" is not usable,
> but has not been removed from the documentation.
> 
> kc
> On 5/24/13 12:41 AM, Meehan, Thomas wrote:
> Laura,
> 
> As I understand it, a BIBFRAME Work can be both a FRBR Work and a FRBR
> Expression. The BIBFRAME vocab for Work defines both expressionOf and
> hasExpression properties so one BIBFRAME Work could be an expression of
> another BIBFRAME Work.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Tom
> 
> ---
> 
> Thomas Meehan
> Head of Current Cataloguing
> Library Services
> University College London
> Gower Street
> London WC1E 6BT
> 
> [log in to unmask]
> 
> From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Laura Krier
> Sent: 23 May 2013 23:50
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [BIBFRAME] Holds and ILL with Bibframe
> 
> Jorg,
> Your breakdown here is really helpful for me, but I have a question
> about your conception of how the library-controlled information is
> handled in BIBFRAME.
> 
> On May 23, 2013, at 12:12 PM, Jörg Prante <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> 
> - extract all library-controlled information out of the FRBR classes -
> the formal description, the classification, the subject cataloging, the
> call number, the shelf location, authority control information, (maybe
> also descriptions of the library service for access to printed and
> electronic resources, it's not clear right now) etc. Put that also into
> bf:Instance.
> 
> I don't know that I would consider this Instance information under the
> BIBFRAME definition of Instance. A lot of it (call number, shelf
> location, library service) seems more like item information, and might
> be a library annotation. It's related to a specific library's copy of
> an Instance.
> 
> I'm also still a little baffled about BIBFRAME's use of Work. I can't
> figure out whether it's closer to FRBR's concept of Work (conceptual
> essence) or Expression. Personally, I think something closer to
> Expression would be more important for libraries' goals, and the line
> seems very blurred to me, here. Are we describing a particular
> expression of a conceptual essence, or the concept/idea itself? Or both?
> I  suppose I will have to anxiously await the release of the Creative
> Work discussion paper. (Though your suggestion to go back to the Primer
> was a very useful one.)
> 
> Laura
> --
> Laura Krier
> Metadata Analyst
> California Digital Library
> 
> 510-987-0832
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Karen Coyle
> [log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net
> ph: 1-510-540-7596
> m: 1-510-435-8234
> skype: kcoylenet
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Stephen Hearn, Metadata Strategist
> Technical Services, University Libraries
> University of Minnesota
> 160 Wilson Library
> 309 19th Avenue South
> Minneapolis, MN 55455
> Ph: 612-625-2328
> Fx: 612-625-3428
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Stephen Hearn, Metadata Strategist
> Technical Services, University Libraries
> University of Minnesota
> 160 Wilson Library
> 309 19th Avenue South
> Minneapolis, MN 55455
> Ph: 612-625-2328
> Fx: 612-625-3428