 |
 |
And I agree that it can not impose its structure on the real world but neither can Linked Data.
OPACs are, or were, simply stand-alone computers that allowed those in the library to access to the electronic catalog that consisted of MARC records. I was simply surprised that you did not know what they were, which I see as a deficit to our profession. One must know about the past in order to move forward. Of course, I understand the basic nature of SPARQL, OWL, and HTTP.
What I find fascinating is your statement that "Linked Data is about modeling the real world, the abstract concepts and physical things and relationships between them, not modeling MARC structures." MARC is about representing the information resources in a library collection---into which we would also put representations of intellectual content (concepts? Ideas? subjects?) and how they relate to intellectual content of other resources in the collection, as well as represent physical attributes of the resources. And I agree that it can not impose its structure on the real world but neither can Linked Data. But on this I will do some more reading. It seems we've exchanged one technology for another (the former passing on its collective data to the latter),in order to reached a goal that keeps getting more 'defined'?.
**************************************************************Shawne D. Miksa, Ph.D.
Associate ProfessorDepartment of Library and Information SciencesCollege of Informationoffice 940-565-3560 fax 940-565-3101
**************************************************************
From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of Martynas Jusevičius <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Sunday, January 24, 2016 3:22 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [BIBFRAME] The Future of Linked Data in Libraries: Assessing BIBFRAME Against Best PracticesSo like, a website? Or are we talking about terminals with text input and CRT monitors?
Linked Data is about modeling the real world, the abstract concepts and physical things and relationships between them, not about modeling MARC structures. Books exist independently of how they are coded in legacy systems or how data about them is accessible. MARC can serve as input that can be transformed to Linked Data descriptions, but it cannot impose its structure on the real world.
Read something about SPARQL and OWL and HTTP, please.
I think this is that point where any hope we have for the newcomers understanding the past in order to understand the future is over...OPAC stands for Online Public Access Catalog. Read something, please.
SMiksa
> On Jan 23, 2016, at 7:36 PM, Martynas Jusevičius <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> I don't know what OPAC is. Events, as all RDF resources, are uniquelly
> identified only by their URIs - not by label, category, or something
> else.
>
> On Sun, Jan 24, 2016 at 12:07 AM, J. McRee Elrod <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>
>>> If you know that a book is about "United States--History--Civil War,
>>
>>
>> Would the event label only be used for events entered under their own
>> name? Some wars are entered under countries, including the US Civil
>> Was and the War of 1812, although the latter is entered under
>> different countries in the US and Canada.
>>
>> Again, how would this distinction be reflected in the OPAC?
>>
>>
>> __ __ J. McRee (Mac) Elrod ([log in to unmask])
>> {__ | / Special Libraries Cataloguing HTTP://www.slc.bc.ca/
>> ___} |__ \__________________________________________________________