Understanding BIBFRAME 2.0
The Library of Congress asked Zepheira to create BIBFRAME (BF) in 2012 as a replacement for MARC because BF brings web visibility to libraries (increase access to and relevancy of objects in library) and offers an extensible solution for the description of resources. BF builds on the simple structure of Dublin Core Metadata Element Sets (DCMES) to link small, descriptive, related sets of resource cataloging metadata. BF allows the simple, standardized cataloging of anything and then the connecting of that to anything else. Linking is the key here. Increasing visibility on the web is largely a result of number and quality of links (think here of SEO, Search Engine Optimization). In 2015, The Library of Congress and Zepheira parted ways with the Library of Congress continuing with BF 2.0 and Zepheira continuing with Bibframe Lite (BL). BL is an attempt to apply BF to a wider range of materials while also moving more quickly through the process than Library of Congress.
Currently, BF 2.0 is in development. It's a collection of tools and templates for catalogers that replaces strings with Uniform Resource Identifiers (URI's), and these URI's are the same wherever the identified thing appears: change one URI and it changes everywhere. You can copy a URI from an identifier into your browser, and it will tell you what it identifies. Each item has its own URI.
Update March 2017
BF can be represented by Resource Description Framework (RDF) triples data model. BF includes work, instance and item (see below)
Work is "conceptual essence"
Instance is the material embodiment of the work and includes info like publisher, place, date of publication and format
Item is the thing itself of an instance and reflects where is this thing actually located and what marks its location (barcode?)
In addition, there are agents (other people associated with a work or instance such as a translator), subjects (what the work is "about") and events (press conference, sporting events, concerts)
BF also changes how we "view" information. Previous information modeling in the library setting was focused on abstract symbols in a logical form. BF changes the focus to associations and natural relationships users might make between items. The emphasis is on relationships as they are used by people, combining both text and diagrams into graphs. Strict interoperability is not required nor probably possible for BF, so adaptability and flexibility are required.
BF vs. Schema.org
Schema.org is similar to BF. OCLC began experimenting with Schema.org in 2011. But Schema.org arose from Bing!, Google, Yahoo and Yandex. Like BF in libraries, Schema.org is used so that library materials can be accessed from search engines. OCLC linked over 300 million catalog records from WorldCat.org. Where Schema.org and BF diverge is that Schema.org is a shallow interface designed to compete across platforms and not just within the library. BF, in contrast, is "deep" because it is designed to be the next generation standard for libraries. OCLC has since designed an interface to go deeper that uses schema.org, Bibliograph.net. As far as I can tell, OCLC hopes to develop a data model that has wide applicability and is not just for libraries while BF is primarily for use in the library. However, BF and Schema.org appear to be "compatible" in their definition of "works". One way that the two systems will be able to work together is by using a "same as" identifier to link to a BF URI.
BF 1.0, BF 2.0 and BL
Bibflow https://bibflow.library.ucdavis.edu/
Artframe is a BF extension
From http://www.loc.gov/bibframe/docs/bibframe2-model.html
RDF Primer
Syntax for storing and exchanging RDF include Turtle and JSON-LD
Query Language is Sparql
Resources
Currently, BF 2.0 is in development. It's a collection of tools and templates for catalogers that replaces strings with Uniform Resource Identifiers (URI's), and these URI's are the same wherever the identified thing appears: change one URI and it changes everywhere. You can copy a URI from an identifier into your browser, and it will tell you what it identifies. Each item has its own URI.
Update March 2017
BF can be represented by Resource Description Framework (RDF) triples data model. BF includes work, instance and item (see below)
Work is "conceptual essence"
Instance is the material embodiment of the work and includes info like publisher, place, date of publication and format
Item is the thing itself of an instance and reflects where is this thing actually located and what marks its location (barcode?)
In addition, there are agents (other people associated with a work or instance such as a translator), subjects (what the work is "about") and events (press conference, sporting events, concerts)
BF also changes how we "view" information. Previous information modeling in the library setting was focused on abstract symbols in a logical form. BF changes the focus to associations and natural relationships users might make between items. The emphasis is on relationships as they are used by people, combining both text and diagrams into graphs. Strict interoperability is not required nor probably possible for BF, so adaptability and flexibility are required.
BF vs. Schema.org
Schema.org is similar to BF. OCLC began experimenting with Schema.org in 2011. But Schema.org arose from Bing!, Google, Yahoo and Yandex. Like BF in libraries, Schema.org is used so that library materials can be accessed from search engines. OCLC linked over 300 million catalog records from WorldCat.org. Where Schema.org and BF diverge is that Schema.org is a shallow interface designed to compete across platforms and not just within the library. BF, in contrast, is "deep" because it is designed to be the next generation standard for libraries. OCLC has since designed an interface to go deeper that uses schema.org, Bibliograph.net. As far as I can tell, OCLC hopes to develop a data model that has wide applicability and is not just for libraries while BF is primarily for use in the library. However, BF and Schema.org appear to be "compatible" in their definition of "works". One way that the two systems will be able to work together is by using a "same as" identifier to link to a BF URI.
BF 1.0, BF 2.0 and BL
Bibflow https://bibflow.library.ucdavis.edu/
Artframe is a BF extension
From http://www.loc.gov/bibframe/docs/bibframe2-model.html
RDF Primer
Syntax for storing and exchanging RDF include Turtle and JSON-LD
Query Language is Sparql
Resources
Jones, E & Seikel, M (Eds). (2016). Linked Data for Cultural Heritage. Facet Publishing.
Comments
Post a Comment