Print

Print


Thanks for the example, Theo.  Very helpful.

I see that you are already adding contribution/Contribution to the Instance, which seems correct.  In short, you are capturing the fact that the paper maker contributed to the creation of the Instance.  I think the note in the Provision Activity is arguably superfluous but in so far as I would expect only one Provision Activity per instance (ideally) and certainly only one of type Manufacture, I don't see what you are doing as terribly ambiguous or imprecise.

Yours,
Kevin


From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum <[log in to unmask]> On Behalf Of Theodore Gerontakos
Sent: Monday, September 14, 2020 3:39 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [BIBFRAME] bf:role question

Yes, certainly, here's an example:

How would we express this RDA statement in BIBFRAME:

<rda:manifestation008> rdam:hasPapermakerPerson <http://theMultiCraftsmanFromKansas/theperson> .

This is what we're hoping for:

<bf:instance12345> bf:provisionActivity [ a bf:Manufacture ;
    bf:agent  <http://theMultiCraftsmanFromKansas/theperson> ;
    bf:role <http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/relators/ppm> ] .

There are lots of specialized roles within provision activities as well as relator terms that represent them.

This is what we're actually doing:

<bf:instance12345>
    bf:provisionActivity [ a bf:Manufacture ;
        bf:agent  <http://theMultiCraftsmanFromKansas/theperson> ;
        bf:note  [ a bf:Note ;
            rdfs:label "Papermaker" ;
            bf:noteType "role in manufacture" ] ] ;
    bf:contribution [ a bf:Contribution ;
        bf:agent <http://theMultiCraftsmanFromKansas/theperson> ;
        bf:role <http://id.loc.gov/vocabulary/relators/ppm> ] .


  --Theo

________________________________
From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> on behalf of Ford, Kevin <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
Sent: Monday, September 14, 2020 6:40 AM
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
Subject: Re: [BIBFRAME] bf:role question


Hello Theo,



I can't quite picture what you are currently doing or what you are trying to do with bf:role and ProvisionActivity.  Can you provide an example please?



Cordially,

Kevin



--

Kevin Ford

Library of Congress

Washington, DC





From: Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Forum <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> On Behalf Of Theodore Gerontakos
Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2020 2:41 PM
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: [BIBFRAME] bf:role question



In BIBFRAME, the property bf:role is used only with bf:Contribution.



We find we want to use bf:role with bf:ProvisionActivity (and its sub-classes) to clarify the roles of agents in the provision activities. Is there any possibility of extending the rdfs:domain to include bf:ProvisionActivity?



What we do now: add a note to the provision activity and use bf:provisionActivity/bf:note/rdfs:label to describe the role (with a bf:note/bf:noteType="role"); then we describe the agent of the provisionactivity as a contributor, allowing us to use bf:role and an LC relator IRI as its value. It seems like an awkward solution.



  --Theo







''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

Theo Gerontakos

Interim Head, Metadata and Cataloging Initiatives

University of Washington Libraries

Box 352900

Seattle, WA  98195-2900

(206) 276-6209 (cell)

''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''