2. ï Sorting out some important definitions
ï A brief history lesson on the RDA Vocabularies
ï A structural tour of the vocabularies, including:
ï Rationale and decision making
ï General and FRBR-constrained elements
ï Potential for extension
ï Putting it all together
ï Language versions of RDA Vocabularies
ï Important related work
ï Our focus is on âWhyâ not âHowâ (weâre not at âHowâ
yet)
Nov. 17, 2011 2ALA TechSource Webinar
3. ï How RDA will be working in the real world
ï WHY?: There arenât tools yet, and we donât really know
what theyâll look like âŠ
ï But maybe we can make some educated guesses?
ï Most likely the tools will be form-based (like the MARC
tools are)
ï There are likely to be fewer places where text is typed in
and more where pull-down lists are available
ï The FRBR structure, if used intelligently by vendors,
should save time and money, as re-use of data will be
possible (choices will still need to be made to identify
the appropriate work and expression when these exist)
Nov. 17, 2011 3ALA TechSource Webinar
4. ï XML assumes a 'closed' world (domain), usually defined by
a schema:
ï "We know all of the data describing this resource. The single
description must be a valid document according to our
schema. The data must be valid.â
ï XML's document model provides a neat equivalence to a
metadata 'recordâ
ï RDF assumes an 'open' world:
ï "There's an infinite amount of unknown data describing this
resource yet to be discovered. It will come from an infinite
number of providers. There will be an infinite number of
descriptions. Those descriptions must be consistent."
ï RDF's statement-oriented data model has no notion of
'recordâ (rather, statements can be aggregated for a fuller
description of a resource)
Nov. 17, 2011 4ALA TechSource Webinar
5. ï In XML these are âattribute/value pairsâ
ï Ex.: Author = Twain, Mark
ï Where, in the context of a bounded record structure we
know what weâre describing
ï In the Resource Description Framework (RDF, the
language of the Semantic Web), these are independent
statements:
ï Ex.: The author of Huckleberry Finn is Mark Twain, or
ï subject = Huckeberry Finn
ï predicate = hasAuthor
ï Object = Mark Twain
Nov. 17, 2011 5ALA TechSource Webinar
6. ï We need to expand our ideas of what machines can
and should do for us
ï We need to articulate better what we, as humans,
bring to the table (and stop thinking we need to
control it ALL)
ï We need to educate ourselves about this new world we
live in (what it is and isnât)
ï We need to understand enough to work with our
vendors to make it happen in our libraries
Nov. 17, 2011 6ALA TechSource Webinar
7. A Brief History
It all started in
London, the last day
of April 2007
Nov. 17, 2011 7ALA TechSource Webinar
8. ï The participants agreed that DCMI and the Joint
Steering Committee for the Development of RDA
should work together to:
ï Develop an RDA Element Vocabulary
ï Expose RDA Value Vocabularies
ï Develop an RDA Application Profile, based on FRBR and
FRAD
ï The first two are largely complete; the third is started
8Nov. 17, 2011ALA TechSource Webinar
9. ï It represented a recognition on the part of library
leaders that it was essential to break out of the data
silo of the past
ï The collaboration started at that meeting is resonating
throughout the world of library data standards (more
on this later)
ï It started the process of exposing library experience
and knowledge to a larger audience
ï It set the stage for libraries to broaden their view of
what they do and what they offer the information
world
Nov. 17, 2011 9ALA TechSource Webinar
10. ïŹ We used the Semantic Web as our âmental modelâ
ïŹ Wanted to create a âbridgeâ between XML and RDF to
support innovation in the library community as a
whole, not just those at the cutting edge or the trailing
edge
ïŹ We registered the FRBR entities as classes in a âFRBR
in RDAâ vocabulary, to enable specific relationships
between RDA properties and FRBR
ïŹ IFLA has followed suit using the Open Metadata
Registry to add the âofficialâ FRBR entities, FRAD,
FRSAR and ISBD
ïŹ This provides exciting opportunities to relate all the
vocabularies together
Nov. 17, 2011 10ALA TechSource Webinar
11. ï Property and value vocabularies are registered in the
Open Metadata Registry (formerly the NSDL
Registry): http://metadataregistry.org/rdabrowse.htm
ï Used RDF Schema (RDFS), Simple Knowledge
Organisation System (SKOS) and Web Ontology
Language (OWL)
ï Decisions oriented to favor approaches that can be
generalized to make other vocabulary based standards
web-friendly, available for use in applications, and
easily updated by communities
Nov. 17, 2011 11ALA TechSource Webinar
12. ï FRBR in RDA Vocabulary declared as classes
ï RDA Properties declared as a âgeneralizedâ vocabulary,
with no explicit relationship to FRBR entities
ï Subproperties for the generalized elements may be
explicitly related to FRBR entities (using âdomainâ)
ï Label/Name includes (Work) or other class to provide
unique name (unless the entity name already appears in
the name of the property)
ï Other generalized subproperties usable by others not
tied to FRBR
ï All this is done according to available best practices for
declaring vocabularies on the Web
Nov. 17, 2011 12ALA TechSource Webinar
13. ï We think of the âgeneralizedâ RDA properties as the
real RDA vocabulary
ï The âboundedâ properties should be seen as the first pass
at an Application Profile
ï Extensions can be built more usefully from the
generalized properties
ï Mapping will be cleaner using the generalized
properties (since most properties mapped to or mapped
from will not be based on FRBR)
ï Generalized properties much more acceptable to non-
library implementers (not often using FRBR)
Nov. 17, 2011 13ALA TechSource Webinar
14. Property (Generalized, no FRBR relationship)
Subproperty (with relationship to one FRBR
entity)
FRBR Entity
Semantic
Web
Library Applications
The Simple Case:
One Property--
One FRBR Entity
Nov. 17, 2011 14ALA TechSource Webinar
15. Book format
Book format (Manifestation)
Manifestation
Semantic
Web
Library Applications
The Simple Case:
One Property--
One FRBR Entity
Nov. 17, 2011 15ALA TechSource Webinar
17. ïŹ There are multiple techniques used in RDA to make
the connection between FRBR entities and RDA
properties
ïŹ We tried to reconcile those in the RDA Vocabularies
ïŹ Some properties related to more than one FRBR
entity
ïŹ Relationships in Appendix J actually include the name
of the FRBR entity in the name and have separate
definitions (we re-used this strategy for the FRBR-
bounded properties)
ïŹ Other properties and sub-properties appear multiple
times in the text and ERDs, with the same definitions
and no indication that they might be repeated
elsewhere (we consolidated these)
Nov. 17, 2011 17ALA TechSource Webinar
18. Property (Generalized, no FRBR relationship)
Subproperty (with relationship to one FRBR
entity)
Subproperty (with relationship to one FRBR
entity)
FRBR Entity
FRBR Entity
Semantic
Web
Library Applications The Not-So-Simple Case:
One Propertyâmore than
One FRBR Entity
Nov. 17, 2011 18ALA TechSource Webinar
19. Extent
Extent (Item)
Extent (Manifestation)
FRBR Item
FRBR Manifestation
Semantic
Web
Library Applications The Not-So-Simple Case:
One Propertyâmore than
One FRBR Entity
Nov. 17, 2011 19ALA TechSource Webinar
21. ï In 2005, the DC Usage Board worked with LC to
build a formal representation of the MARC Relators
so that these terms could be used with DC
ïŹ This work provided a template for the registration of
the role terms in RDA (in Appendix I) and, by
extension, the other RDA relationships
ïŹ Role and relationship properties are registered at the
same level as elements, rather than as attributes (as
MARC does with relators, and RDA does in its XML
schemas)
ïŹ Applications can choose either approach
Nov. 17, 2011 21ALA TechSource Webinar
22. âSuperâ Property
Subproperty (with relationship to one FRBR
entity)
Subproperty (Generalized, no FRBR
relationship)
FRBR Entity
Semantic
Web
Library Applications The Roles Case:
Properties, Subproperties
and FRBR Entities
Mapping,
Etc.
Nov. 17, 2011 22ALA TechSource Webinar
24. ïŹ RDA sets up Publication, Distribution, Manufacture
and Production statements very much the way they
have been done since catalog card days:
ïŹ Assumed aggregation of Place, Name and Date are
obvious leftovers from catalog cards, and are not
necessary to enable indexing or display of those
elements together if libraries want to do that
ïŹ We viewed those aggregations as âSyntax Encoding
Schemesâ (as defined in the DCAM) and built in
ways to accommodate them within the bounded
properties
ïŹ Those using the generalized properties (outside
libraries, usually) need not be constrained by these
traditional aggregations of properties
Nov. 17, 2011 24ALA TechSource Webinar
25. Aggregated Statement (no domain or range)
Aggregated Statement Subproperty
Range: RDA Syntax Encoding Scheme
(Subclass of RDF Datatype)
Domain:FRBREntity
Range: [Specific] Encoding Scheme
(Subclass)
General Property (no domain or range)
Subproperty
Pre-coordinated Statements: Structure
Option 1
Nov. 17, 2011 25ALA TechSource Webinar
26. Publication Statement (no domain or range)
Publication Statement (Manifestation)
Range: RDA Syntax Encoding Scheme
(Subclass of RDF Datatype)
Domain:Manifestation
Range: Publication Statement Encoding
Scheme (Subclass)
Place of publication (no domain or range)
Place of publication (Manifestation)
Pre-coordinated Statements: Example
Option 1
Nov. 17, 2011 26ALA TechSource Webinar
27. ï Release from the tyranny of records
ï Potential for use with a variety of encodings
ï Ability to maintain statements at a more granular level
ï Opportunity to re-think how we build, maintain and share
data
ï Potential for sharing data beyond the library silo
ï Both directions!
ï A challenge to our old notions of what library data can do
and should be doing
ï As our users migrate to the web and away from library
catalogs, we need to follow them (and lead them
appropriately!)
Nov. 17, 2011 27ALA TechSource Webinar
29. ï How do we take advantage of the RDA Vocabulary
infrastructure?
ï Relationships between properties is built-in, allowing
âbottom upâ aggregation of data
ï Tools to enable easier data creation (with machine
assistance) are critical
ï Our thinking about how we build and share data needs
to reflect modern ideas about data use, not MARC
ï Ex.: records as aggregations of information, not
templates to be filled in (although some tools may
continue to look like thatâs what theyâre doing)
Nov. 17, 2011 29ALA TechSource Webinar
30. Nov. 17, 2011ALA TechSource Webinar 30
ID=23456 hasAuthor âKurt
Vonnegutâ
ID=23456 isFormOfWork âNovelâ
Statements on the Floor?
31. Nov. 17, 2011ALA TechSource Webinar 31
ID=23456 hasAuthor âKurt
Vonnegutâ
ID=23456 isFormOfWork âNovelâ
Is This Really Chaos?
32. Nov. 17, 2011ALA TechSource Webinar 32
ID=23456 hasAuthor âKurt
Vonnegutâ
ID=23456 isFormOfWork âNovelâ
Or Just an Aggregation
In the Making?
44. ï The inclusion of generalized properties provides a path
for extension of RDA into specialized library
communities and non-library communities
ï They may have a different notion of how FRBR
âaggregatesâ
ï For example, a colorized version of a film may be viewed as a
separate work
ï They may not wish to use FRBR at all
ï They may have additional properties to include, that
have a relationship to the RDA properties
ï This allows other communities to use this data without
problems
Nov. 17, 2011 44ALA TechSource Webinar
48. ï We wrote about the decisions we made for RDA in
DLib:
http://dlib.org/dlib/january10/hillmann/01hillmann.h
tml
ï Need to continue to disclose what weâve learned and
work on building best practices documentation in this
environment
ï We need research and innovation to help us move
forward
Nov. 17, 2011 48ALA TechSource Webinar
50. ï Registered elements and vocabularies can include
multiple languages
ï The Open Metadata Registry has been working with
the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek to demonstrate this
with German translations in the OMR for specific
vocabularies
ï Other language versions being discussed with national
libraries and language groups by ALA Publishing in
conjunction with translations of RDA guidance text
ï OMR enhancements planned to make building of
language versions easier
Nov. 17, 2011 50ALA TechSource Webinar
52. ï âFunctional Requirementsâ family or âFRBR family of
modelsâ:
ï FRBR, 1998: Bibliographic Records [data]
ï FRAD, 2009: Authority Data
ï FRSAD, [2010]: Subject Authority Data
ï Consolidated model in development
ï RDF/XML representation of the consolidated edition
of ISBD.
ï Relating FR, ISBD and RDA, SKOS, FOAF, etc.
Nov. 17, 2011 52ALA TechSource Webinar
53. ï Representation of FRBRer model element set is mainly
complete
ï Classes and properties have âapprovedâ status
ï FRAD and FRSAD close behind
ï Representation in Resource Description Framework
Schema (RDFS) is informing work on combining and
consolidating the model family
ï Also supplies âlearning curveâ for Semantic Web
environment
ï FRBR is a conceptual model built on the E-R
methodology which is intrinsically applicable to
representation in RDF, while ISBD is a data standard
ALA TechSource Webinar
Nov. 17, 2011 53
54. Extent
Extent of text Extent of still image
Extent of text (I/) Extent of still image (I/)Extent of text (M/) Extent of still image (M/)
Extent (M/) Extent (I/)
Label (Domain/Range)
Subproperty
RDA
properties
Nov. 17, 2011 54ALA TechSource Webinar
55. Extent
Extent of text
Extent of text (M/)
Extent (M/)
Label (Domain/Range)
Subproperty
RDA
has extent of the carrier (M/)
FRBR
SameAs
has extent (R/)
ISBD
has extent of the carrier
FRBR lite ISBD lite
has extent
RDA/IFLA properties (minimal
linkage)
Note: Manifestation sub-class-of Resource
Nov. 17, 2011 55ALA TechSource Webinar
56. Extent
Extent of text
Extent of text (M/)
Extent (M/)
Label (Domain/Range)
Subproperty
RDA
has extent of the carrier (M/)
FRBR
SameAs
has extent (R/)
ISBD
has extent of the carrier
FRBR lite ISBD lite
has extent
RDA/IFLA properties (maximum
linkage)
Nov. 17, 2011 56ALA TechSource Webinar
57. Label (Domain/Range)
Subproperty
RDA FRBR
SameAs
ISBD
FRBR lite ISBD lite
RDA/IFLA/other properties (minimal
linkage)
DCT
Extent (/S)
DC
format
Extent
Extent of text
Extent of text (M/)
Extent (M/) has extent of the carrier (M/)
has extent (R/)
has extent of the carrier
has extent
BIBO
numPages (D/l) numVolumes (C/l)
Classes: Manifestation, Resource, Collection, Document, SizeOrDuration, literal
Note: Document sub-class-of
Resource
Nov. 17, 2011 57ALA TechSource Webinar
58. ï DCMI/RDA Task Group Wiki:
http://dublincore.org/dcmirdataskgroup/
ï RDA Vocabularies:
http://metadataregistry.org/rdabrowse.htm
ï Diane: metadata.maven@gmail.com
Slides on IFLA Vocabularies by Gordon Dunsire
Flickr images thanks to: Trois TĂÂȘtes (TT), Craft*ology
Nov. 17, 2011 58ALA TechSource Webinar