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

Re: Linked Data URIs in MARC Authorities

From: Martin Malmsten <Martin.Malmsten@kb.se>
Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2010 22:10:32 +0200
Cc: public-lld <public-lld@w3.org>
Message-Id: <68B48279-4E89-4B4F-9479-DD62ABA3E183@kb.se>
To: "Panzer,Michael" <panzerm@oclc.org>
Michael,

I can see where it gets messy when linking from individual subfields. I think it was a perfectly valid suggestion, and adding a standardised way to add URIs to (parts of) a MARC21 record would be welcome. On the other hand a lot of the code-subfields have implicit information about where the codes are supposed to come from (i.e the link might not be necessary).  A small change to MARCXML would ofcourse let it carry the URL in an attribute instead, which would make MARCXML better suited for transformation to RDF.

Is there an ongoing discussion somewhere on this?

/martin

On Oct 1, 2010, at 6:52 PM, Panzer,Michael wrote:

> Jeff and Martin,
>  
> the main problem is that there is no general support ( for URIs in MARC (in $0 and elsewhere). Some fields (like 856 Electronic Location and Access) recognize $u for that purpose.
>  
> A discussion paper was submitted to MARBI and discussed at ALA Midwinter (2010-DP02: Encoding URIs for controlled values in MARC records; http://www.loc.gov/marc/marbi/2010/2010-dp02.html), but was pretty much shot down by the committee, mainly because MARC lacks a consistent identifier strategy; e.g., there is no easy way of dealing with the relationship(s) between the identifier (URI) and identified subfield value, etc.
>  
> An additional problem that came up was that the paper didnít take MARCXML into consideration, even when it is treated only as a serialization of MARC 21 (as it is done today).
>  
> Michael
>  
> From: public-lld-request@w3.org [mailto:public-lld-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Martin Malmsten
> Sent: Friday, October 01, 2010 12:26 PM
> To: Young,Jeff (OR)
> Cc: public-lld@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Linked Data URIs in MARC Authorities
>  
> I'm considering/testing $0 in the 1XX fields, analogues to $0 in the bib record. The idea is that a DbPedia/Freebase/VIAF URI could authorise an authority record. "Global headings change" becomes a fun challenge with LD URIs within the record :)
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
> On 1 okt 2010, at 18:00, "Young,Jeff (OR)" <jyoung@oclc.org> wrote:
> 
>> If somebody wanted to put a Linked Data RWO URI in a MARC Authority record, where would it plausibly go?
>>  
>> Jeff
>>  
>> ---
>> Jeffrey A. Young
>> Software Architect
>> OCLC Research, Mail Code 410
>> OCLC Online Computer Library Center, Inc.
>> 6565 Kilgour Place
>> Dublin, OH 43017-3395
>> www.oclc.org
>> 
>> Voice: 614-764-4342
>> Voice: 800-848-5878, ext. 4342
>> Fax: 614-718-7477
>> Email: jyoung@oclc.org
>>  

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Martin Malmsten (martin.malmsten@kb.se) - Senior Developer
National Library of Sweden / National cooperation dept. / LIBRIS
http://libris.kb.se
Received on Friday, 1 October 2010 20:11:02 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 1 October 2010 20:11:03 GMT