W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lld@w3.org > August 2010

Re: Open Library and RDF

From: <gordon@gordondunsire.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2010 05:55:07 +0100 (BST)
To: Thomas Baker <tbaker@tbaker.de>
Cc: "public-lld@w3.org" <public-lld@w3.org>
Message-ID: <1786695889.1015621.1282020907232.JavaMail.open-xchange@oxltgw17.schlund.de>
Tom
 
Yes, to all suggestions and questions. I see ISBD as an illustration of the kind
of challenge facing library models; there are many other examples.
 
Cheers
 
Gordon
 

On 17 August 2010 at 00:24 Thomas Baker <tbaker@tbaker.de> wrote:

> On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 09:38:51PM +0100, gordon@gordondunsire.com wrote:
> > Would it be possible for me to give a presentation to the joint session in
> > Pittsburgh?
> >  
> > I am involved in the development of an RDF representation of the
> > International
> > Standard Bibliographic Description (ISBD). ISBD is a mix of bibliographic
> > attributes (RDF properties) with a generic domain of (bibliographic)
> > Resource
> > (unlike the WEMI model in FRBR and RDA), content guidelines (like RDA), and
> > display format based on punctuation (unlike FRBR or RDA). Preliminary
> > registration of RDF properties can be found in the Open Metadata Registry.
> > ISBD
> > specifies repeatability and mandatoriness constraints (unlike RDA, which
> > just
> > recommends "core" properties for each of WEMI) and sequence of elements when
> > displayed (along with punctuation). We have decided that the best way to
> > model
> > all this is with an ISBD application profile (and XSLT or equivalent for
> > generating the punctuation). The ISBD Review Group is assisting me with
> > expenses
> > to attend the Pittsburgh meeting ... and I'll be submitting a use case to
> > the
> > LLD XG real soon now.
>
> Sure - that would be great.  The way I picture the meeting,
> we would not so much focus on the particular selection of
> properties for meeting the particular requirements of ISBD.
> Rather, I would like for us to take one step back from such
> details and consider what, for your group, constitutes an
> "application profile".  For example, are you following DCMI
> guidelines, some other guidelines, or no particular guidelines?
> What sort of information do you need to capture in the
> application profile, and how do you picture its function?  As a
> rough consensus document?  A guide for software developers?
> Something else?
>
> > I'd like to think of me and my colleagues as gamma-testers of the
> > application
> > profile approach.
>
> Hopefully we will be able to give you some useful feedback.
>
> > At some point in the future, probably under the aegis of the newly-approved
> > (but
> > not-yet formally constituted) IFLA Namespaces Technical Group (more news
> > from
> > IFLA!), we'll attempt to relate ISBD, FRBR/AD/SAD, and (as a result of
> > stronger
> > links with JSC) RDA, 'cos there's huge overlap between properties.
>
> That's great to hear.
>
> > (And a reminder that the third goal of the DCMI RDA Task Group is the
> > development of an RDA application profile - as far as I'm concerned, that is
> > still our intention, and now that JSC has brought RDA to the market-place,
> > I'm
> > hoping we can resume progress ...)
>
> Would you like to present something about that as well?
>
> > I'd also be willing to work with Marcia (of course :-) on your proposal for
> > a
> > presentation on the subject domains, which I consider to be the most
> > significant
> > area where libraryland can contribute to linked-data and the core of the
> > Semantic Web. And libraryland really does need advice and support from
> > ontologyland; I suspect "further work" is indeed needed.
>
> Let's sharpen our pencils then and help define those future work items...
>
> Tom
>
Received on Tuesday, 17 August 2010 04:55:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:27:37 UTC