Print

Print



Y'all ready for this? ;) [1]

When is a literal property a 'somethingNote' and when is it just a 'something'?

I assume (lacking previously mentioned MARC to BibFrame mapping document) that all of the Notes come from 5XX fields, which seems like something that could easily be rationalized along with some of the other properties, again assuming they're not 5XX and hence didn't get the Note moniker.

For example, these two look ... well ... identical:

frequency: Intervals at which the issues or parts of a serial or the updates to an integrating resource are issued.
frequencyNote: Current or former publication frequency of a resource.


Current notes are:
  copyNote
  awardNote
  contentsNote
  graphicScaleNote
  illustrationNote
  supplementaryContentNote
  dissertationNote
  geographicCoverageNote
  languageNote
  temporalCoverageNote
  creditsNote
  performerNote
  frequencyNote
  note (!)
  musicMediumNote
  findingAidNote

And the following seem like they're intended to be "notes" in the more generic sense of added description by a cataloguer or other:

  frequency
  custodialHistory
  immediateAcquisition
  notation 
  responsibilityStatement
  providerStatement -- or are "Statements" transcriptions from the Instance?
  editionResponsibility 
  contentAccessibility  (though c.f. schema.org/accessibilityFeature)

Given the discussion regarding assigners of URIs being important, it seems that creators of notes would be also important?  And thus Notes could be their own class, bf:Note, with properties including value, assigner, type and so forth.

Rob

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=avcS0aYJ2a8  Warning: seizure inducing flashing, terrible animation, poppy 90s music, ...

--
Rob Sanderson
Technology Collaboration Facilitator
Digital Library Systems and Services
Stanford, CA 94305