Regarding community-specific extensions, and in particular for rare materials:  There is an RBMS Bibliographic Standards Committee task force looking at this - largely for the reasons Kate notes.  We've given ourselves a deadline of Annual 2016 to have a drafted element set and white paper.  I'm happy to chat further about this project, if anyone is interested, or wants to mirror it for other communities.  :)


Allison Jai O'Dell, Metadata Librarian
University of Florida, George A. Smathers Libraries
(352) 273-2667  |  [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>

From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Karen Coyle
Sent: Friday, November 13, 2015 3:28 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [BIBFRAME] Properties of Item proposal

Kate, great examples! I can't imagine that any specialities that vary notably from general book cataloging will be served by a "one size fits all" cataloging code or data format. What seems to make sense to me would be to design extensions for these materials -- extensions that are under the purview of an organization that can represent that specialty. Music libraries - the Music Lib Assn. Rare books - maybe SLA? Serials - please someone take on serials so the rest of us don't have to think about them! Art - ARLIS. Just suggestions, but each community has a gathering place for experts, and should have control over its own data. Extensions would allow that.

I don't believe that any other way will satisfy the wide range of needs of everyone who describes cultural heritage objects.

On 11/12/15 6:17 AM, Bowers, Kate A. wrote:

Ah, hem. Special collections have a lot more they need to say about "items" than are dreamt of in your philosophy. Currently most of those things are kept in holdings records or in bib. records with $$3 or $$5 to specify the "institution" and/or "copy" to which it applies.

Take, for example, this (author's own copy plus added material OCLC# 864841712) Harvard University Archives catalog record: <>  and this (where annotations are the more important content, online item to peruse: and finally my simplest case (annotated by former owner: Some special collections notes apply to all examples of the work while some apply to only the item in hand.

Does anyone know what BIBFRAME intends to do about these and similar cases?

Kate Bowers
Collections Services Archivist for Metadata, Systems, and Standards
Harvard University Archives
Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA
voice: (617) 384-7787
fax: (617) 495-8011
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>