Print

Print


Hi Karen;

 

a BIBFRAME Work corresponds (roughly) to a FRBR Work or Expression; i.e. a FRBR Expression of a FRBR Work is normally modeled in BIBFRAME as a separate Work.

 

So Expression is not a core BIBFRAME class, however BIBFRAME does define the property hasExpression,  to indicate that a particular Work is, in the eyes of FRBR, a FRBR Expression of that Work. Property hasTranslation is a subproperty of hasExpression , and so if you declare a  BIBFRAME Work to be a translation, via hasTranslation, you are implicitly declaring it to be an Expression.

An individual implementation may choose not to implement as such.  So to your question “Would there be a way in BIBFRAME to model them as the same work?,   Suppose you say….

             <http://bibframe.example.org/work/gunsOfAugust>

                             a                             bf:Work ;

                             bf:language           <http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/iso639-1/eng> ;

                            hasTranslation        <http://bibframe.example.org/work/gunsOfAugust> .

<http://bibframe.example.org/work/gunsOfAugust>
                             a                             bf:Work ;
                            bf:language           <http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/iso639-1/fr> ;
                            isTranslationOf       <http://bibframe.example.org/work/gunsOfAugust> .

…… they are the same work.  However I don’t know if you can get away with that; there are logical inconsistencies and you’d likely get inferencing errors.

Right, the method of making a note won’t buy you much, but I suggested it only as a placeholder, pending reconciliation.

Ray

 

 

From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Karen Coyle
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 1:59 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [BIBFRAME] Work record(s) that have Instances with more than one language

 

This is quite a departure from FRBR and RDA in terms of works. In those, translations are the same work, but different expressions. Would there be a way in BIBFRAME to model them as the same work?

As for linking translations, the current method of making a note is not going to yield much, but in the cases where there is a uniform title, that unifies the translations of a work because it uses the same title, not a translated title, for all translations:

"Hamlet. German"

"Hamlet. Italian"

kc

On 1/24/17 7:22 AM, Denenberg, Ray wrote:

The question, I think, comes down to this:  If there is a Work, in a given language – English for example -   and that work gets translated into a different language – French, for example;  are the English and French versions a single Work or separate Works.  (Is this a reasonable reformulation of the question?) 

 

They are two different Works. They can be related to each another via property bf:hasTranslation, and its inverse, bf:translationOf.   So for example English is the original language of Guns of August and there is a French translation:

  

             <http://bibframe.example.org/work/gunsOfAugustEnglish>

                             a                             bf:Work ;

                            hasTranslation        <http://bibframe.example.org/work/gunsOfAugustFrench> .

 

and

 

      <http://bibframe.example.org/work/gunsOfAugustFrench>

        a                             bf:Work ;

      isTranslationOf        <http://bibframe.example.org/work/gunsOfAugustEnglish> .

 

I was hoping to come up with a real-life BIBFRAME example from our conversion, but unfortunately this idea doesn’t work well based on marc records, because although the marc record may tell you that there is a French translation, it doesn’t tell you where it is, and some sort of matching algorithm has to come into play.   We haven’t quite gotten that far yet, which is why I cannot produce a real example yet. 

 

However, as a placeholder, say you have the English (original) and you simply want to express that there is a French translation (but you don’t yet know where):

 

             <http://bibframe.example.org/work/gunsOfAugustEnglish>

                             a                             bf:Work ;

                            hasTranslation        [rdfs:label “French translation”  ] .

 

Please note that I have only considered the simple case where there is an original, and a translation of the original.   There are possible complicating factors:  There may not be one single “original” language; or there may be, but a particular translation isn’t translated directly from the original but rather from an intermediate translation.   I don’t have answers to these situations.

 

 

Ray

 

 

From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of [log in to unmask]
Sent: Monday, January 16, 2017 8:26 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [BIBFRAME] Work record(s) that have Instances with more than one language

 

Which of the following is valid (either, both…)?

·         If a Work has 2 Instances with different languages then there can be one Work record with 2 Instances and both languages should be in the Work record

·         If there are 2 Instances with different languages then there must be 2 Work records each with one Instance.

 

Shlomo Sanders

CTO

Tel: +972-2-6499356

Mobile: +972-54-5246298

[log in to unmask]">[log in to unmask]

cid:<a href=[log in to unmask]">
www.exlibrisgroup.com

 

 



-- 
Karen Coyle
[log in to unmask] http://kcoyle.net
m: +1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600