I work with MODS in Islandora*, and we are currently straining to figure out how to deal with MODS in the future.
The Islandora community has been hugely invested in MODS (though badly represented on your implementation list, I'm sorry to see) but with the move to Fedora 4 and an RDF-based repository system, we have been considering how best to deal with our data. I have been heading the Metadata Interest Group for the last half-year with this goal in mind.
Do we try to express MODS in RDF?
Do we migrate to another expressive RDF-based schema, like BIBFRAME?
Do we abandon the granularity and expressiveness of MODS and condense into Dublin Core Terms?
Do we retain MODS (and its underlying assumptions of an integral "metadata record") and map dynamically into RDF where required?
We have been examining the two LOC initiatives, MODS RDF
, and BIBFRAME
, with some trepidation. Both seem to make excessive use of blank nodes, and are therefore hard to implement in the way we had imagined (what does a BIBFRAME "record" editor look like?). MODS RDF seems to be abandoned, and BIBFRAME doesn't have any conversions that we can see from MODS, just MARC.
Would you have time to chat, about what LOC considers to be the future of MODS, especially with relation to RDF?
* The Islandora system includes a fantastic yet complicated system ("XML Form Builder") which lets us create Drupal forms that map to MODS with arbitrary complexity and XML attributes. Editing a MODS record using one of these forms does so non-destructively (preserving any elements in the original that aren't represented in the form). However this piece of software is considered too complex to manage, and we do not see a possibility to migrate it to the next version of Islandora.