- From: Jakob Voss <jakob.voss@gbv.de>
- Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 12:14:24 +0200
- To: public-lld@w3.org
On 19.10.2011 00:43, Lukas Koster wrote: > Jakob is right when he says we don't have Expressions in our catalogues. > Nor do we have Works. We only have Manifestations (=bibliographic > records) and Items (holdings/items). Works and Expressions are implicit > and repeated. It is virtually impossible to add these FRBR entities to > existing systems, also with RDA. I am not sure whether we actually describe Expressions, but there seems to be consensus on this list that most library catalog records are about frbr:Manifestations and frbr:Item. So I started with converting library records to frbr:Manifestation and frbr:Item in RDF and try to link these entities to other resources (organizations, places, works etc.). Actually there are URIs for works, for instance: http://www.librarything.com/work/3032251 http://dbpedia.org/resource/The_Diary_of_a_Young_Girl http://dbpedia.org/resource/The_Diary_of_Anne_Frank_%281959_film%29 http://dbpedia.org/resource/The_Diary_of_Anne_Frank_%281980_film%29 http://dbpedia.org/resource/The_Diary_of_Anne_Frank_%28TV_serial%29 http://dbpedia.org/resource/The_Diary_of_Anne_Frank_%28opera%29 http://dbpedia.org/resource/The_Diary_of_Anne_Frank_%28play%29 Maybe some of this URIs better refer to frbr:Expressions, but I do not really understand frbr:Expressions. > Karen is right when saying that library linked data is about holdings > information (unique data) that should be linked to web based > bibliographic metadata. This means we also need to replace existing > introverted catalogue systems with new extroverted systems. I am just about to create URIs for frbr:Items for more then 400 libraries (branches not counted) and 80 million items, for instance the following URIs refers to an exemplar of the diary of Anne Frank as book an to one exemplar of the 1959 film: http://uri.gbv.de/item/opac-de-hil2:epn:032163339 http://uri.gbv.de/item/opac-de-hil2:epn:645178810 Until now DAIA classes and properties seem to fit for the library-related parts. I even removed some proposed DAIA classes in favour of already existing classes. The core classes are illustrated in this diagram: http://www.gbv.de/wikis/cls/DAIA#DAIA_model_as_graph The reason why I do not fully stick to FRBR with DAIA (I prefer bibo:Document from the Bibliographic ontology, which is more or less equivalent to foaf:Document) is the common use case of DAIA. I bet that people often want to know about the availability of some document without telling you, or even without knowing, whether they refer to a work or to an expression or to a manifestation. And they are right. Unfortunately there is no connection between FRBR and this kind of normal documents. I would map it the following way: bibo:Document = frbr:Endeavour - frbr:Item This implies that frbr:Work, frbr:Expression, and frbr:Manifestation or subclasses of bibo:Document. We can discuss about not including frbr:Work, but some explicit connection is needed. Jakob -- Jakob Voß <jakob.voss@gbv.de>, skype: nichtich Verbundzentrale des GBV (VZG) / Common Library Network Platz der Goettinger Sieben 1, 37073 Göttingen, Germany +49 (0)551 39-10242, http://www.gbv.de
Received on Friday, 21 October 2011 10:15:06 UTC