The elimination of bf:Annotation and bf:Authority in no way suggest that annotations or authorities are any less important than we thought.  We think that BIBFRAME can interact with both, without the need for these classes.


Authorty.  A key philosophical change from 1.0 to 2.0 is that a bf:Person (etc.) is no longer a name, it’s a person (etc).  So and RDF description for a bf:Person will be a description of the person rather than a description of the name.  Within that description of the person there may be a pointer to a description of the name.

 

For example,

 

 

     bf:contributor  [
                     a                      bf:Contribution ;
                     bf:role            “creator” ;
                     bf:person         <http://bibframe.example.org/person/FJones> ] .

In this case  http://bibframe.example.org/person/FJones  is a description of FJones. It may or may not include a link to an authority record for F. Jones.   If bf:person points to a madsrdf description, it will point to the RWO within the authority for F. Jones  (a change which will be introduced in 2.0), e.g.  http://id.loc.gov/authorities/names/FJones#RWO> ]  and the RWO will point to the authority.

 

In 1.0 the example this looked like:

 

     bf:contributor [     a                                                  bf:Person ; bf:Authority ;
                                      bf:authorizedAccessPoint      “Jones, F.” ;
                                      bf:hasAuthority                       <http://id.loc.gov/authorities/names/FJones> ] .

 

The essential difference being that bf:Person is no longer a subclass of bf:Authority and bf:hasAuthority is eliminated.

 

Annotations.   Long story, I will write up our thinking on this and post later.

 

Ray

 

 

 

 

From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Shlomo Sanders
Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2015 1:39 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [BIBFRAME] BF Core Classes

 

What will replace  bf:Annotation and bf:Authority ?

In my option, both made sense and were understandable by those without put LD background.

Thanks,

Shlomo

 

Sent from my iPad


On Nov 16, 2015, at 20:52, Denenberg, Ray <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

The plan right now is that there will be no bf:Annotation or bf:Authority classes in 2.0.  --Ray

 

From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ehlert, Mark K.
Sent: Monday, November 16, 2015 10:09 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [BIBFRAME] BF Core Classes

 

On the first page of the BF 2.0 Item Draft Proposal it states: “Thus there will be three core classes: Work, Instance, and Item.”  Does this signal that bf:Annotation and bf:Authority are no longer core?

 

--

Mark K. Ehlert                 O'Shaughnessy-Frey Library
Cataloging and Metadata        University of St. Thomas

  Librarian                    2115 Summit Avenue

Phone: 651-962-5488            St. Paul, MN 55105

<http://www.stthomas.edu/libraries/>

  "Experience is by industry achieved // And perfected by

the swift course of time"--Shakespeare, "Two Gentlemen of

Verona," Act I, Scene iii