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

Re: Linked Data URIs in MARC Authorities

From: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2010 14:46:33 -0700
Message-ID: <20101001144633.hnzbspee0cgk800s@kcoyle.net>
To: Ross Singer <ross.singer@talis.com>
Cc: "Young,Jeff (OR)" <jyoung@oclc.org>, Martin Malmsten <Martin.Malmsten@kb.se>, public-lld@w3.org
Quoting Ross Singer <ross.singer@talis.com>:

> Jeff,
>
> The 1xx$0 is actually used in bib records (not authority) and is defined as:
> $0 - Authority record control number (R)
>
> http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd100.html
>
> It seems applicable, but the context it would be used in would sort of
> imply the opposite meaning than what it does in bibliographic records.

I agree with Ross. In addition, putting a $u or $0 in the 1xx implies  
that the link is relevant to the "preferred form of the name" not the  
entity being described. The identifier for the authority record itself  
goes in the 001 or the 010 (although the latter only is for the LCCN).  
Any subfield in a field relates only to that field, logically, not the  
record as a whole. That said, the MARC formats are full of  
inconsistencies and any such statement probably has an exception. I  
suggested an 0xx because at least in bib records those fields are  
generally record level, and there are a variety of record-level  
identifiers that can be found in there (along with a miscellaneous  
assortment of other data, like languages, dates, and geographic codes).

kc

>
> -Ross.
>
> On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 3:47 PM, Young,Jeff (OR) <jyoung@oclc.org> wrote:
>> Martin,
>>
>> I can believe that "the 1XX identifies what the record is *about*"   
>> and would challenge anyone to argue otherwise.
>>
>> What is your argument for choosing $0 rather than $u? Neither are   
>> currently specified and $u appears to be commonly used for URIs in   
>> other fields:
>>
>> http://www.loc.gov/marc/856guide.html#other_fields
>>
>> Jeff
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Martin Malmsten [mailto:Martin.Malmsten@kb.se]
>>> Sent: Friday, October 01, 2010 3:32 PM
>>> To: Young,Jeff (OR)
>>> Cc: public-lld@w3.org
>>> Subject: Re: Linked Data URIs in MARC Authorities
>>>
>>> Jeff,
>>>
>>> I understand, but would not putting a $0 in the 1XX accomplish just
>>> that since the 1XX identifies what the record is "about"? I'm just
>>> saying that by using $0 you could link to other things (or Things) from
>>> other parts of the record as well.
>>>
>>> However, we do actually use 856 with a $z in our production environment
>>> today. It works, but I do not like the amount of implicit information
>>> with this (or rather our version of this) solution.
>>>
>>> Example:
>>> 100 '1' ' ' $aStrindberg, August, $d1849-1912
>>> 856 '4' '8' $uhttp://viaf.org/viaf/54154627 $zVIAF
>>>
>>> /martin
>>>
>>> On Oct 1, 2010, at 8:54 PM, Young,Jeff (OR) wrote:
>>>
>>> > Martin,
>>> >
>>> > I think our use cases are getting mixed up. I want a place to
>>> identify the thing the Authority record (as a whole) represents.
>>> Linking to *other* things inside a MARC record is a harder and more
>>> controversial problem as Michael's response indicates. I'm hoping this
>>> is low-hanging fruit, but I admit the difference is subtle.
>>> >
>>> > Jeff
>>> >
>>> >> -----Original Message-----
>>> >> From: Martin Malmsten [mailto:Martin.Malmsten@kb.se]
>>> >> Sent: Friday, October 01, 2010 2:36 PM
>>> >> To: Young,Jeff (OR)
>>> >> Cc: public-lld@w3.org
>>> >> Subject: Re: Linked Data URIs in MARC Authorities
>>> >>
>>> >> Jeff, Karen.
>>> >>
>>> >> I prefer a subfield over a field because may I want to link only
>>> parts
>>> >> of the record, and not necessarily the 1XX-field, to another
>>> resource
>>> >> without having to resort to a $8-link (*shudder*).
>>> >>
>>> >> Example:
>>> >> 150 ' ' ' ' $aMödrar
>>> >> 750 ' ' '0' $aMothers $0
>>> >> http://id.loc.gov/authorities/sh85087526#concept
>>> >>
>>> >> /martin
>>> >>
>>> >> On Oct 1, 2010, at 6:46 PM, Young,Jeff (OR) wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>> How about this:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> 856 4# $u http://example.org/foo
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Here's the documentation for the field:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> http://www.loc.gov/marc/authority/ad856.html
>>> >>> http://www.loc.gov/marc/856guide.html
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Jeff
>>> >>>
>>> >>> From: Martin Malmsten [mailto:Martin.Malmsten@kb.se]
>>> >>> 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
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Martin Malmsten (martin.malmsten@kb.se) - Senior Developer
>>> National Library of Sweden / National cooperation dept. / LIBRIS
>>> http://libris.kb.se
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Please consider the environment before printing this email.
>>
>> Find out more about Talis at http://www.talis.com/
>> shared innovation™
>>
>> Any views or personal opinions expressed within this email may not   
>> be those of Talis Information Ltd or its employees. The content of   
>> this email message and any files that may be attached are   
>> confidential, and for the usage of the intended recipient only. If   
>> you are not the intended recipient, then please return this message  
>>  to the sender and delete it. Any use of this e-mail by an   
>> unauthorised recipient is prohibited.
>>
>> Talis Information Ltd is a member of the Talis Group of companies   
>> and is registered in England No 3638278 with its registered office   
>> at Knights Court, Solihull Parkway, Birmingham Business Park, B37   
>> 7YB.
>>
>
>



-- 
Karen Coyle
kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
ph: 1-510-540-7596
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet
Received on Friday, 1 October 2010 21:47:12 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 1 October 2010 21:47:13 GMT