W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lld@w3.org > March 2011

Re: Question about MARCXML to Models transformation

From: Diane I. Hillmann <metadata.maven@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2011 12:52:18 -0500
Message-ID: <4D77BE52.8000603@gmail.com>
To: "Young,Jeff (OR)" <jyoung@oclc.org>
CC: Ross Singer <ross.singer@talis.com>, public-lld@w3.org
  Jeff,

Most MARC records don't contain many-to-many relationships, except for 
an aggregated container (festschrift, some music records, multiple 
version records, etc.).  Those are rather easily flagged.  You should 
try out the MST, and take a look, rather than listen to me go on about 
it! (http://www.extensiblecatalog.org/).

Diane

On 3/9/11 12:28 PM, Young,Jeff (OR) wrote:
> Diane,
>
> There is a many-to-many relationship between E&M. Does the toolkit try
> to detect the presence multiple expressions in a MARC record or does is
> assume there is only one?
>
> Jeff
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: public-lld-request@w3.org [mailto:public-lld-request@w3.org] On
>> Behalf Of Diane I. Hillmann
>> Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2011 12:00 PM
>> To: Ross Singer
>> Cc: public-lld@w3.org
>> Subject: Re: Question about MARCXML to Models transformation
>>
>>
>>    It might be good to note here that the strategy used by the
>> eXtensible
>> Catalog Metadata Services Toolkit is to parse the MARC records out
> into
>> a WEMI structure, then go back and determine which Works are the same
>> (and from there, Expressions, etc.), rather than try to determine that
>> as part of the initial process.  This seems to me a good strategy.
>>
>> Diane
>>
>> On 3/9/11 10:53 AM, Ross Singer wrote:
>>> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 10:27 AM, Richard Light
>>> <richard@light.demon.co.uk<mailto:richard@light.demon.co.uk>>
> wrote:
>>>
>>>      This is probably my bibliographic ignorance coming out, so
>>>      apologies if that's the case.  I was assuming that "different
>>>      URLs" = "different Expressions". However, from the discussion
> I'm
>>>      realising that the issue is about how to tease out WEMI from
>>>      records which lack this world view.
>>>
>>> Richard, it's understandable - it's a mess!
>>>
>>> But this is sort of where I'm getting at.  Our best laid plans still
>>> need to account for the 214 million records (just using Worldcat as
>> an
>>> example, meaning there are considerably more) that already exist.
>>>
>>> I think the day when we hit the 24 hour period that more RDA
>> resources
>>> were created than AACR2 we can begin to start thinking about how
>>> RDA/FRBRer/etc. begins to shape the way we create linked data.
> Until
>>> then, all we have to work with is what we've got.
>>>
>>> -Ross.
>>
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 9 March 2011 17:52:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 March 2011 17:52:53 GMT