Re: Linked Library Holdings/Items

Quoting Jakob Voss <jakob.voss@gbv.de>:

>
> Another reason why I do not care about frbr:Expression is that we  
> just don't have this distinction in our catalogues. We only have  
> bibliographic records and holdings items. The latter map to  
> frbr:item, but I am not sure about the former. So I better wait  
> until we have real world data that covers both expressions and  
> manifestations.

IMO, there will ALWAYS be real world data that does not adhere to  
FRBR's view of resources, in part because that view is overly divisive  
-- essentially, it doesn't allow you to have creators or subjects  
unless you have a Work entity defined; nor to have a language of text  
unless you have an Expression. This is overkill for most bibliographic  
applications.

It might be simpler, since your interest is in holdings, to create a  
non-FRBR item/holdings entity. This entity could include links to  
institutions along with the usual item identifiers (call numbers, bar  
codes, and such).

What we then need is a good file of institution authority data with  
identifiers, locations, and contact information.

I think that holdings information is absolutely vital to linking  
libraries to Web resources, at least as important as bibliographic  
data. After all, what's the use of linking bibliographic data if you  
can't then find what libraries can provide access? Linking libraries  
to the Web really means linking library holdings to the Web, with the  
bibliographic data as the linking method but the goal being the  
library location.

For that reason I am very glad that Jakob has brought up this topic --  
I am chagrined that we did not give this topic much importance in the  
LLD report, but it could become a first project for a community group  
on LLD if we can find volunteers to lead that effort.

kc


-- 
Karen Coyle
kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
ph: 1-510-540-7596
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet

Received on Tuesday, 18 October 2011 16:42:18 UTC