Ross Singer wrote:
On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 2:17 PM, Karen Coyle <li...@kcoyle.net> wrote:
My problem with bibo is that it's strongly oriented toward academic journal
articles... I would like to see a comparison to MARC, if anyone has done
that, which might give us an idea of what isn't there. For example, I don't
see the various work/work, work/expression relationships. But it has great
detail in some areas, like time intervals and access rights.
Well, I'm not sure I agree with the assessment that it's geared
towards academic journals... there's been a lot of work towards all
kinds of citations, esp. court cases and whatnot. See the examples:
http://wiki.bibliontology.com/index.php/Examples
Still looks pretty limited to me. What academics cite isn't a full
bibliographic universe. No music, no films, no way to do realia. And
citing isn't the same as bibliographic description. Don't get me wrong,
I think it's very complete as a citation format, I just don't think it
meets other needs. The right tool for the job... and all that.
As far as not including FRBR, BIBO doesn't have to, because the FRBR
vocabs: http://vocab.org/frbr/core.html and
http://vocab.org/frbr/extended.html already do. This way BIBO can
focus on describing citations, FRBR can focus on
work/expression/manifestion/item relationships and other vocabularies
can focus on other attributes (size, location, circ status, whatever).
Somehow, though, they have to work together, at least where they are
describing the same thing. I think the interaction between things like
FRBR/Work and citation is interesting and complex. The RDA Online effort
is working to allow you to assign particular data elements to FRBR
entities through application profiles -- thus you can have a 'work
title' which may be different to the 'manifestation title.' No one uses
these differences in citations, but then again we haven't yet used them
in library catalogs -- both citations and current library cataloging
limit themselves to describing manifestations. However, if you are
writing a literary criticism of "Moby Dick" you probably aren't only
referring to a particular manifestation, but to the work as a whole.
Right now, citation standards don't address this.
Also note that IFLA is registering the FRBR vocabulary in the
metadataregistry.org registry. I suspect it will look different to the
one at vocab.org, although I haven't looked at the IFLA trial version in
comparison to the one at vocab.org. Presumably FRAD will also be
registered by IFLA in the same way.
kc
This is part of the flexibility of RDF, the ability to pick and choose
among schemas to describe resources however you need to.
-Ross.
--
-----------------------------------
Karen Coyle / Digital Library Consultant
kco...@kcoyle.net http://www.kcoyle.net
ph.: 510-540-7596 skype: kcoylenet
fx.: 510-848-3913
mo.: 510-435-8234
------------------------------------
