Would all 2009 publications from U Mass Press reference the same
ProviderEvent, or is each publication considered to have a ProviderEvent of
its own?


On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 11:46 AM, Karen Coyle <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>  Thanks, Nancy. The examples are very interesting.
> I want to point out, since it comes up here and elsewhere, that
> is handling the publication statement problem (e.g. how to keep the
> publication information together as a unit) by treating publication as an
> event with its own graph:
> ‘http://NLMCAMMS/Event/PE2 <http://nlmcamms/Event/PE2>’ a bf:ProviderEvent
>  ;
> rdam:publicationStatement ‘Amherst : University of Massachusetts Press,
> [2009]’  ;
> bf:providerPlace  ‘http://NLMCAMMS/GeogAuth/P101
> <http://nlmcamms/GeogAuth/P101>’ <http://localauthority/NLMP101%27%20> ;
> bf:providerPlace ‘http://NLMCAMMS/Countries/C002
> <http://nlmcamms/Countries/C002>’  ;
> bf:provider  ‘http://NLMCAMMS/NameAuth/A200
> <http://nlmcamms/NameAuth/A200>’  ;
> bf:providerDate ‘2009’ .
>  FRBRoo also defines publication/production as an event, and that allows
> you to say specific things about that event. I think this is a good way to
> view this data. I'd also be interested to hear how/if this works for
> non-book materials whose production processes may be different from those
> of print materials (e.g. films, performances).
> kc
> On 6/11/15 4:21 PM, Fallgren, Nancy (NIH/NLM) [E] wrote:
>  In November 2014, the National Library of Medicine (NLM) announced that
> it was taking a different approach to BIBFRAME (BF) experimentation (see *NLM’s
> Early Implementers registration*
> <>).  This new
> approach involved development of a core, widely shareable BF vocabulary
> that could be extended for greater granularity with existing descriptive
> schema.   In pursuit of this goal, NLM has been collaborating with
> Zepheira, George Washington University (GWU), and University of California,
> Davis (UCD) in development of the *BF Lite vocabulary* <>,
> as hosted by Zepheira.  Part of the perspective NLM brings to this
> collaboration is a focus on creating new cataloging data directly in BF
> rather than converting legacy bibliographic data.
> The scope of NLM’s work on BF development to date has been deliberately
> narrow in order to keep short term goals modest and achievable.  NLM and
> GWU produced a spreadsheet that correlated BF Lite with PCC RDA BIBCO
> Standard Record (BSR) elements and RDA RDF properties.  The broader group
> of collaborators used that spreadsheet as a starting point for discussion,
> evolving it to a static snapshot (as of 6/8/2015) of a portion of the BF
> Lite core vocabulary.  The resulting *spreadsheet*
> <>
> includes BF Lite properties and classes that expand beyond the BSR
> elements, but that NLM and GWU believe are appropriate for cataloging print
> monographs.  In contrast, the BF Lite vocabulary on **
> <> continues to evolve and includes properties and
> classes that are applicable more broadly than print monographs.
> To demonstrate how the BF Lite core vocabulary in the spreadsheet can be
> applied, NLM and GWU manually produced two mockups of original BF
> cataloging using that vocabulary with extensions from other schema.  Each
> mockup provides two examples of cataloging a print monograph using BF Lite
> with a modular approach: one extends BF Lite mainly with Zepheira’s BF
> extended vocabularies and the other extends BF Lite mainly with RDA RDF
> properties. These mockups are publicly available on Google Drive: *The
> myth of the addicted army*
> <>
> and *The contributions of Rudolph Virchow*
> <>
> .
> The experimental BF vocabulary and mappings released with this
> announcement are not complete or final, but rather a starting point.  We
> believe our efforts have produced a vocabulary sufficient to test the
> theory that a BF vocabulary built from a core of widely shareable
> properties provides flexibility and extensibility for describing diverse
> resources.  It is our hope and expectation that both the spreadsheet and
> the BF Lite core vocabulary will be used by the community for
> experimentation, so that BF can evolve and develop in a tested, community
> driven manner.  NLM believes that BF development is still fluid and should
> evolve through thoughtful vetting and testing, with emphasis on creating
> new data rather than converting legacy data.
> NLM welcomes community feedback about our experimentation. We have set up
> a public GitHub repository named *BIBFRAME-NLM*
> <>, where we request that you
> post all comments, issues and questions.  An expanded version of this
> announcement and links to related documents above can be found in the ‘read
> me’ section of the BIBFRAME-NLM repository.  There is no login required to
> view the documents or to view comments and issues in the BIBFRAME-NLM
> repository; however, you will need to create a GitHub username and password
> to contribute comments, issues, or questions.  When contributing comments,
> issues, or questions, please apply the prepopulated labels indicating what
> you are commenting on, e.g., the spreadsheet, the mockups, etc.
> On behalf of the NLM BIBFRAME Team,
> Nancy Fallgren
> Nancy J. Fallgren
> Metadata Specialist Librarian
> Cataloging and Metadata Management Section
> Technical Services Division
> National Library of Medicine
> *[log in to unmask]* <[log in to unmask]>
> *Links*
> BIBFRAME-NLM GitHub repository
> **
> <>
> BF Lite core spreadsheet
> **
> <>
> Mockup: The contributions of Rudolph Virchow
> **
> <>
> Mockup: The myth of the addicted army
> **
> <>
> BF Lite
> ** <>
> Library of Congress BIBFRAME Implementation Register
> **
> <>
> --
> Karen [log in to unmask]
> m: +1-510-435-8234
> skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600

Stephen Hearn, Metadata Strategist
Data Management & Access, University Libraries
University of Minnesota
160 Wilson Library
309 19th Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55455
Ph: 612-625-2328
Fx: 612-625-3428
ORCID:  0000-0002-3590-1242