Print

Print


I didn't think many of them did. I'm just saying that those few are ahead of the game and can easily take advantage of it. I can also believe that those few aren't ideal. Unless they're planning to scrap everything, though, why not add D2RQ as a thin interface on the side and parse out the easy stuff? It's better than all-or-nothing.

Sent from my iPad

On May 26, 2013, at 12:55 PM, "Ross Singer" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> I think you're being overly generous to the architecture of ILMSes. Not all have relational databases (including major ones), and those that do, typically don't have schemas that would be conducive to D2RQ. 
> 
> -Ross. 
> 
> On Sunday, May 26, 2013, Young,Jeff (OR) wrote:
>> I suspect that some ILS systems use relational databases. If so, someone could download D2RQ or one of the more modern R2RML tools and use that to map their data to the BIBFRAME model. They could then publish that mapping for other installations of that ILS system to use.
>> 
>> http://www.w3.org/TR/r2rml/
>> 
>> Jeff
>> 
>> Sent from my iPad
>> 
>> On May 26, 2013, at 11:05 AM, "Karen Coyle" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> 
>>> Mac,
>>> 
>>> I'm assuming that there will be programs available, just as now there are programs for converting from MARC21 to MARCXML. What I am less confident about is whether these programs, built for LC's records, will give the desired results for other libraries. There is a huge difference between a single library with a fairly coherent set of practices [*] and the variety of actual data in the range of libraries that you work with. What would be great would be the establishment of an open source repository where people who make modifications or write their own programs could make those programs available for others. It may be easier to adapt a program that has worked for, say, multi-lingual catalogs than to begin with a program designed for a library with only one language of cataloging.
>>> 
>>> kc
>>> [*] I was struck by a remark of Kevin's about the ISBNs that they have found the when there are multiples, the first is for the hardback. I can very much imagine that being the case in LC's catalog, given their purchase and work-flow, but as you know, 1) not all systems keep the fields in order 2) not all libraries purchase the hardback before the trade paperback. So that's an example of something that LC can rely on for their data that may not generalize to other libraries.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 5/25/13 7:56 PM, J. McRee Elrod wrote:
>>>> When/if Bibframe is implemented by the national libraries and
>>>> bibliographic utilities, will there be a publically available Bibframe
>>>> to NMARC crosswalk for those systems still in MARC?  Would OCLC offer
>>>> a MARC export?
>>>> 
>>>> Might prioducing MARC21 records from Bibframe be a niche market for
>>>> SLC, as is oroducing AACR2 compatible records from RDA, and UKMARC
>>>> from MARC21?
>>>> 
>>>> Of what online conversion programs should we be aware?
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>    __       __   J. McRee (Mac) Elrod ([log in to unmask])
>>>>   {__  |   /     Special Libraries Cataloguing   HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
>>>>   ___} |__ \__________________________________________________________
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> Karen Coyle
>>> [log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net
>>> ph: 1-510-540-7596
>>> m: 1-510-435-8234
>>> skype: kcoylenet