Great question. Linked data certainly works better with more atomic things. 

There are arguments made that there is semantics in the order of pre-coordinated headings. If that’s truly the case, then the whole of the pre-coordinated heading refers to a distinct concept/entity and should have its own URI. Still, it’s been my experience that any semantics in the order of pre-coordinated heading is lost because of inconsistent application of that order. The URIs for the subdivisions are most useful as a heading maintenance strategy (when we need to update the subdivision label), not necessarily for something to point to on their own as concepts. 

Re: the Poetry URI discussion, If we’re talking about concepts like Poetry, it would be best if they were SKOS concepts that could be referred to in multiple scenarios; the general concept of Poetry as the genre of a work or the subject of the work (*of* Poetry *or* about Poetry, *but* still Poetry). This would be much like when we refer to the same Person with different relationships to Works (*by* or *about* a person). We don’t need different entities if we’re talking about the same thing.

Also, It doesn’t make a lot of sense in linked data to say things only exist as subjects. Any thing can be the subject of a work, but it can be discussed differently in other scenarios.


Steven Folsom
Metadata Strategist and Standards Advocate
Cornell University Library

From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of "Young,Jeff (OR)" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply-To: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Thursday, November 12, 2015 at 8:40 PM
To: "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: [BIBFRAME] Categories--Genre/Form

This makes me wonder if/how the notion of "subdivision" transitions to a linked data universe. Do they factor out?

On Nov 12, 2015, at 7:30 PM, Adam L. Schiff <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

Please note also that the URI is for the LCSH form subdivision authority record, not the LCSH heading Poetry.  The URI for that is   It would still be best to use the record from LCGFT for a form/genre term.  


Adam L. Schiff
Principal Cataloger
University of Washington Libraries
Box 352900
Seattle, WA 98195-2900

From: Denenberg, Ray <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2015 2:50 PM
Subject: Re: [BIBFRAME] Categories--Genre/Form
To: <[log in to unmask]>

Nancy - I take your point, but strictly speaking, If you dereference the URI:
(and note that the example has a slight error, the .html should have been omitted)
and get RDF returned:

note that it is a madsrdf:GenreForm. (As opposed to a madsrdf:Topic. MADS doesn't know about subjects --topics, but not subjects).

Granted, the URI:
makes it seem to be a subject.


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Nancy Lorimer
> Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2015 6:18 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: [BIBFRAME] Categories--Genre/Form
> A short comment on Example 4 of Categories.
> It would make more sense here to use the URI for the genre/form term from
> LCGFT (the genre/form thesaurus), rather than the subject heading URL from
> Nancy
> --
> Nancy Lorimer
> Head, Metadata Dept
> Stanford University Libraries
> [log in to unmask]
> 650-725-8819