Linked data may hold the potential to solve some classic serials dilemmas like latest vs. successive entry, or single vs. multiple records for print and online. How do these hopes mesh with the evolving current state of linked data projects in the commercial and library sector as well as with LC’s Bibframe initiative? The speakers will provide three different perspectives. An “early experimenter” and member of the Bibframe group modeling serials will discuss her experiences and thoughts on future directions. A publisher from a company that has reorganized some of its infrastructure and processes to facilitate linked data will share the goals and provide examples of the benefits of that project. Finally, the head of the U.S. ISSN Center will take an ISSN perspective as well as compare international work modeling serials according to FRBR-OO (object-oriented) with the Bibframe serials modeling effort. Audience input will be solicited in order to provide an exchange of ideas and viewpoints. (moderated by Laurie Kaplan)

1. Bibliographic Framework
Transition Initiative
Nancy Fallgren
Metadata Specialist Librarian
National Library of Medicine
National Institutes of Health, DHHS
NASIG
June 7, 2013

2. A Little Background
MAchine Readable Cataloging (MARC) (1967)
A communication format for sharing cataloging via
“machines”
2

3. 3
Technology has advanced . . .
MARC has not kept pace.

4. Cataloging has changed . . .
• Resource Description and Access (RDA) (2013)
– Focuses on relationships in and among resources
– Vocabularies and relationships are being
developed in a linked data format
– Adjustments to MARC to accommodate RDA
renders both standards more complicated and
confusing
4
MARC has been
left behind.

5. Replacing MARC
“On the Record” (Working Group on the Future of
Bibliographic Control, 2009)
– 3.1.1 Develop a More Flexible Extensible Metadata Carrier
– 3.1.2 Integrate Library Standards into Web Environment
Report and Recommendations of the U.S. RDA Test
Coordinating Committee (2011)
– Findings: Systems, Metadata, and Technical Feasibility (p.
101)
• “ . . . it [MARC] has reached the limit for significant improvement
in allowing our data to be widely integrated and used across the
information landscape.”
• “While one of RDA’s goals is to explicitly express resource
relationships, MARC will not allow our systems to easily display
and utilize these relationships. . . . MARC may hinder the
separation of elements and ability to use URIs in a linked data
environment.”
5

6. BIBFRAME’s Goals
• Flexible/extensible framework for adaptability
and longevity
– Rule agnostic
– Web-based
• Leverage linked data model for sharing resource
description
– Make use of controlled vocabularies and authoritative
data sets published as URIs
– Make explicit relationships within and among
resources at a granular level
6

7. The Semantic Web: From Linked
Documents . . .
BOOK, written by AUTHOR and published by
PUBLISHER, is about TOPIC.
<Title> BOOK
<Creator> AUTHOR
<Publisher> PUBLISHER
<Subject> TOPIC
<URL> http://ebk/eBOOK.pdf
7

8. To Linked Data
BOOK, written by AUTHOR and published by
PUBLISHER, is about TOPIC.
http://resource/BOOKid <http://hasAuthor> http://viaf/AUTHORid
http://resource/BOOKid <http://isPublishedBy> http://onix/PUBLISHERid
http://resource/BOOKid <http://isAbout> http://LSCH/TOPICid
http://resource/BOOKid <http://hasURL> http://ebk/eBOOK.pdf
8

9. To Linked Data.
BOOK
Author
Subject
Publisher
Article
Journal
Author
Subject
hasPublisher
hasPublisher
hasCreator
hasCreator hasCreator
hasCreator
isAboutisAbout isAbout
publishedIn
Article
Article
Article
publishedIn
isAbout
hasCreator
hasURL
9

10. 10

11. Simple BIBFRAME Model
Authority
Work
Authority
Annotation
hasCreator hasSubject
hasInstance
hasReview
Instance
11
http://viaf.org/id http://id.loc.gov/lcsh/id
http://bibframe/annotation/review/id
http://bibframe/work/id
http://bibframe/instance/id

12. BIBFRAME Who’s Who
12
Early Experimenters

13. 13
• How does RDA fit in the proposed model?
• How will specific categories of resources fit in
the proposed model, e.g., serials and music?
• How will non-MARC metadata schemes be
mapped and encoded?
• What’s missing from the proposed model?
• How does BIBRAME align with Schema.org’s
efforts in this same area?

14. Discussion Papers
• Annotations
– (published May 2013)
• Authorities
– (published May 2013)
• Relationships
• Holdings and Items
• Initial Articles and Sorting
• Collections/Aggregates (including serials/journals)
• Schema.org
14

15. Serials in BIBFRAME
15

16. Serials are messy
Can a serial be a bf:Work, “a
conceptual cataloging item,”
when it’s grounded in time and
place?
Should there be a new
“Collection” class to collocate
collections of bf:Works?
Should “Collection” be a type of
bf:Work?
Are supplements new bf:Works?
16

17. and complex.
17

18. 18
Slide by Sally McCallum, ALA Midwinter 2013

19. Get Involved
Get more information and transform MARC
records at BIBFRAME.org
Comment on the BIBFRAME listserv at
http://listserv.loc.gov/listarch/bibframe.html
Thank you!
fallgrennj@mail.nlm.nih.gov
19