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

Re: [open-bibliography] Draft development vocabulary for bibliographic metadata

From: Karen Coyle <kcoyle@kcoyle.net>
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 08:09:16 -0700
Message-ID: <20100616080916.uliet1olr4ggswkw@kcoyle.net>
To: William Waites <ww-keyword-okfn.193365@styx.org>, William Waites <william.waites@okfn.org>
Cc: Ross Singer <ross.singer@talis.com>, List for Working Group on Open Bibliographic Data <open-bibliography@lists.okfn.org>, "rufus.pollock@okfn.org" <rufus.pollock@okfn.org>, Ben O'Steen <bosteen@gmail.com>, public-xg-lld@w3.org
Quoting William Waites <william.waites@okfn.org>:


>
> As it is, it looks like a MARC record at a minimum consists in:
>
>     * one xyz:Manifestation
>           o one dc:publisher
>     * one (implied) xyz:Work
>           o one or more dc:contributor (or sub-properties like author,
>             translator, etc)
>           o one or more identifiers, bibo:isbn bibo:issn etc
>           o one or more dc:subject from a controlled vocabulary


William, I'm not quite sure what your "at a minimum" represents, so  
this answer may or may not fit your use case.... however, MARC doesn't  
actually have required fields, but most systems do make a small set  
mandatory. Most of the required ones are in the 00X range, and many of  
those are administrative data. Of the variable fields, the only one  
that I have seen as mandatory is the title (245). That would be the  
manifestation title.

In case you haven't seen this, there are statistics on the actual  
field usage at:

http://www.mcdu.unt.edu/?p=45

I also want to note that some of the more useful data comes out of the  
Leader and the 008 fields (resource type, date of publication,  
language).

kc

-- 
Karen Coyle
kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
ph: 1-510-540-7596
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet
Received on Wednesday, 16 June 2010 15:10:11 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 16 June 2010 15:10:11 GMT