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

Antw: Linked Library Holdings/Items

From: Adrian Pohl <pohl@hbz-nrw.de>
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 15:49:02 +0200
Message-Id: <4E9859EE02000014000424B7@agrippa.hbz-nrw.de>
To: <jakob.voss@gbv.de>,<dini-ag-kim-lld@lists.d-nb.de>, <public-lld@w3.org>

 >>>Jakob Voss <jakob.voss@gbv.de> schrieb am 14.10.2011 um 13:10:
> Hi,
> I just started to experiment with RDF encoding of information about 
> library holdings. Has anyone done something in this direction yet, so we 
> can adjust our conceptual models and ontologies?

We have done something in this direction with lobid.org. Currently, we only link frbr:manifestations (the non-series things described by library records) to organisations which have at least one item instantiating this manifestation. We don't re-use or mint any item URIs and, thus, use blank nodes. This looks like this, for example:

@prefix wdrs:    <http://www.w3.org/2007/05/powder-s#> .
@prefix frbr:    <http://purl.org/vocab/frbr/core#> .
@prefix isbd:    <http://iflastandards.info/ns/isbd/elements/> .
@prefix dcterms:  <http://purl.org/dc/terms/> .
@prefix bibo:    <http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/> .
@prefix rdf:     <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#> .

      rdf:type frbr:Manifestation , bibo:Book ;
      isbd:P1004 "With reference to reference" ;
      dcterms:creator <http://d-nb.info/gnd/135539897> ;
      wdrs:describedby <>
      dcterms:subject <http://d-nb.info/gnd/4054490-4> , <http://d-nb.info/gnd/4137933-0> ;
      dcterms:extent "VIII, 200 S." ;
      dcterms:format "print" ;
      dcterms:issued "1983" ;
      dcterms:language "eng" ;
      bibo:isbn10 "0915145537" , "0915145529" ;
      bibo:isbn13 "9780915145539" , "9780915145522" ;
      frbr:exemplar [
         rdf:type frbr:item
         frbr:owner <http://lobid.org/organisation/DE-465> 
     ] .

> In my terminology, a holding resource is an "item" as the "Item" entity 
> from FRBR. I created an equivalent item class in DAIA ontology and found 
> that the FaBiO ontology defines its own subclass of frbr:item. I am not 
> sure whether we really need this three classes for library holdings:
> http://purl.org/ontology/daia/Item
> http://purl.org/spar/fabio/Item
> http://purl.org/vocab/frbr/core#Item

We are using frbr:item (as seen above).

> In lack of existing RDF properties for library holdings I created
> http://purl.org/ontology/daia/label
> for call numbers and
> http://purl.org/ontology/daia/heldBy
> for a "holding" relationship between item and a library institution. (by 
> the way: is "held by proper English or better "hold by"?). Unfortunately 
> the international ISIL agency has not defined an URI prefix for ISIL 
> yet, so I recommend to use the prefix from lobid.org.

The holding relationship can also be represented by http://vocab.org/frbr/core#owner ("A property representing an entity that owns an item."). So, you don't have to mint a new one...

> The FaBiO has some more properties that could be used to describe 
> library holdings, but I hesitate to reuse purely theoretical ontologies 
> from academics that have not been applied to real world library data.

Same problems here. We don't use FaBiO because it isn't used  anywhere else. Also it is quite complex and implementing some kind of idiosyncratic FRBR flavor (who doesn't...). It doesn't seem very sensible to me in some parts I've looked at.

> ISO 28560 and its data model could also be helpful, but I don't have a 
> copy of it (I think the relevant parts are page 6-12 of ISO 
> 28560-2:2011). This is the best information I could find:
> http://www.bic.org.uk/e4librariesfiles/pdfs/110524%20UK%20Data%20Model%20for
> %20RFID%20in%20Libraries%20final.pdf
> http://www.bic.org.uk/e4libraries/11/RFID-/
> Do we have URIs for "ONIX media format" and "MARC media format" yet and 
> how do you relate an item to its format?

Until now, we have used literals for specifying the format and medium using the properties dcterms:format and dcterms:medium. It's all not very stable yet.  Input for the literal is MAB field 050[1]. We'd also be happy about a controlled vocabulary.

> Here are some examples of my current, rudimentary encoding of some 
> holding data in RDF (in German):
> http://uri.gbv.de/item/opac-de-hil2:epn:134005953
> http://uri.gbv.de/item/opac-de-7:epn:943768179
> To get a visual feeling of the underlying RDF graphs, just add 
> "?format=svg" to the URIs
> I am still looking for good RDF properties to connect an item to the 
> library record which is about the item's frbr:Manifestation (or 
> frbr:Expression?).

Why connect an item to the record if you can connect it to the manifestation itself? If an item is connected to a manifestation it already is indirectly connected with the record/the description of the manifestation.

Funnily, just today I had a related question about relating in RDF a journal to a library which at least holds one issue of this journal and came up with the solution shown in. The initial problem was that we have URIs for journals in the German Union Catalogue of Serials (Zeitschriftendatenbank, ZDB) and have URIs of libraries which own some issues of this journal, without knowing which concrete issues these are. As the issue as well as the item are unknown/have no URI (yet), the result contains two blank nodes...

All the best

[1] http://www.d-nb.de/standardisierung/txt/segm000.txt

[2] https://wiki1.hbz-nrw.de/download/attachments/3442037/journal-bestand.png
Received on Friday, 14 October 2011 13:49:44 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:27:44 UTC