- From: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
- Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 10:09:48 +0200
- To: "gordon@gordondunsire.com" <gordon@gordondunsire.com>
- CC: Emmanuelle Bermes <emmanuelle.bermes@bnf.fr>, Ross Singer <ross.singer@talis.com>, public-xg-lld@w3.org
Emmanuelle, Gordon, Thanks for the comments! I was waiting to hear whether Gordon has other remarks, but I guess this won't happen now, so I updated http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/minutes/2010/08/19-lld-minutes.html#item07. For Gordon's clarification on FRBR I just made a link to the mail below, as it is quite long. Cheers, Antoine > > > Ross, Emmanuelle and others > > This is still not correct. > > FRBR is not deprecated in favour of a consolidated model. I said (or > intended to say that) it is likely to be deprecated when (and if) a > consolidated model is developed and authorised. (Work on the > consolidated model has commenced, and is expected to take at least a > year.) The FRBR Review Group will publish an authorised RDF > representation of FRBR within a month, and clearly it will not be > deprecated as soon as it is published. > > The IFLA Namespaces Working Group is being developed, but may take some > time to set up as it is dependent on the development of a "core > activity" for coordinating and promoting IFLA bibliographic standards. > The Working Group will advise and assist IFLA in the development and > maintenance of a technical infrstructure to support standards > maintenance, coordination and promotion. Bodies responsible for the > development and maintenance of specific standards will continue to do > so; these include the FRBR Review Group and the ISBD Review Group. The > Namespaces Working Group will advise the work on specific standards, and > is likely to have a role in developing mappings, interoperability, etc. > between different standards. I therefore sits at a higher level than the > individual standards groups. > > More formal informaton about these developments will appear on the IFLA > website as minutes and other documentation are created and approved. I > hope to provide further information for the forthcoming RDA/FRBR agenda > item. > > The note about ISBD is correct. > > I'll check the full draft minutes and get back to you if anything else > requires correction. > > Cheers > > Gordon > > On 20 August 2010 at 15:24 Emmanuelle Bermes <emmanuelle.bermes@bnf.fr> > wrote: > > > Thank you Ross for your efficient scribing ! > > > > I would like to add 2 things regarding these minutes : > > > > - the decision regarding the deadline is not really clear in the minutes. > > We agreed on the call that we would stick to the 25th August as a > deadline > > to come up with a little number of well curated use cases, so that we can > > discuss them and validate the template. But LLD members can > contribute use > > cases after this date. > > > > - in Gordon's report there are some crucial things missing, I suggest to > > complete like that (if Gordon is OK, of course) : > > > > > > > GordonD: FRBR, as is, is deprecated in favor of a consolidated model > > > combining FRBR and FRSAD > > > > > A specific Namespaces task group has been created within IFLA to work on > > expressing FRBR as RDF > > Also work on another standard, ISBD : International Standard... > > > > > ... bibliographic description different than FRBR, more similar to > > > RDA > > > ... specific rules about how elements should be displayed > > > ... will use a DC application profile for this > > > ... will feed back into DCMI and LLD > > > ... hope to make a crosslinking between FRBR and ISBD > > > ... much of the discussion taking place around linked data > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > Emmanuelle > > > > -- > > ===== > > Emmanuelle Bermès - http://www.bnf.fr > > Manue - http://www.figoblog.org
Received on Tuesday, 24 August 2010 08:10:23 UTC