W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > August 2015

Re: Books identifications

From: LAURA DAWSON <ljndawson@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2015 09:25:08 -0400
To: Cyril Otal <cyrilo@bookeen.com>, "Young,Jeff (OR)" <jyoung@oclc.org>
CC: "semantic-web@w3.org" <semantic-web@w3.org>, "public-schemabibex@w3.org" <public-schemabibex@w3.org>
Message-ID: <D1EF6E5A.CC48B%ljndawson@gmail.com>
Hi - 

Itıs been a while since I chimed in, but this is right up my alley. (I
work with identifiers in the book industry.) Which is to sayŠitıs
problematic.

Iıve worked with Ivan Herman on the DigiPub group and weıve bumped up
against similar issues, of course. I can explain your questions below.

Each separate edition of a book gets a separate ISBN. So E1B-E4B would all
get separate ISBNs. Multi-volume sets get an ISBN for the set, and
additional ones for each volume if those volumes are sold separately. Not
all books have ISBNs, though. Books that are not traded in the market
donıt have to have them. Self-published books donıt have to have them.
Ebooks donıt have to have them (though most publishers assign a single
ISBN for all formats of an ebook, whether Kindle or EPUB), and of course
this causes its own problems. So in that sense, yes, a book can have a DOI
and no ISBN.

There is currently no authoritative global database of all books
published. The publishing industry itself can be quite against
authoritativeness, which makes it difficult to bring into the 21st
century. :) Getting to a stage where we have a canonical URI for a book is
going to take years.

On 8/11/15, 8:25 AM, "Cyril Otal" <cyrilo@bookeen.com> wrote:

>cathy.dolbear@oup.com wrote
>> I'm a little confused by your use of "editor" in your example  - do you
>>really mean "publisher"? And most vocabularies use the term "volume"
>>rather than "tome".
>
>You're right. Sorry for my bad English and my hazardous translations.
>
>Nicolas Chauvat and Jeff Young : I appreciate your answers about
>vocabularies. It's interesting, since it seems to be works to implement
>them in RDF.
>
>But I want to focus on identifiers (the first step of semantics),
>because even without a Triple store, it would be better to use the right
>identifiers to add more interoperability and prepare the semantic
>migration.
>
>cathy.dolbear@oup.com wrote
>> If you're interested specifically in identifiers for books, the ISBN
>>can be useful, but bear in mind it only refers to the work in a
>>particular format - so there would be a different ISBN for F1 and F2 in
>>your example.
>
>Could you be more specific ?
>Will E1B, E2B1, E2B2, E3B1, E3B2, E3B3, and E4B (physical books) have 7
>different ISBN?
>Will F1B, F2B1 and F2B2 (digital files) have 3 ISBN different?
>
>I've read somewhere that a publication in several volumes will get one
>ISBN, and each volume get one different too. Is that true?
>
>And still about ISBN : do you recommend ISBN 13 or GTIN-13?
>
>> If the book is published online, you can use its DOI as its URI instead
>
>A book can have a DOI and no ISBN ?
>
>Why in Onix files[1] they are so many different identifiers? Or in
>BIBO[2]? What are their relations?
>
>And what about ARK[3]?
>
>Wikidata identifiers sound nice, but there is no authority to attribute
>them, and no warranty that each book will be identified.
>
>Thanks all for your thinkings!
>
>Regards,
>Cyril
>
>
>[1] : http://www.stison.com/onix/codelists/onix-codelist-5.htm
>[2] : http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/ (all rdfs:subProperties of
>http://purl.org/dc/terms/identifier )
>[3] : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archival_Resource_Key
>
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 11 August 2015 13:25:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 07:43:02 UTC