Functional requirements for bibliographic linked data: the FR

family and the Semantic WebGordon Dunsire

Presented to the ALCTS FRBR Interest Group, ALA Annual, 24 June 2011

Overview

BackgroundResource Description FrameworkRepresenting Functional Requirements for the

Semantic WebSome issues

Legacy catalogue records

FRBRDoes not cover“authorities”

FRADDoes not cover

subjects

FRSAD

FRConsolidated

model

1998 2009 2010 2012?Semantic Web versions recapitulate this sequence:

* Earlier models in use before later models published* Later models re-use elements from earlier models* Reflects semantic development over time* Provides learning curve for FRBR Review Group

Background

RDA: resource description and access is based on FRBR and FRADBibliographic metadata content guidelines

DCMI RDA Task Group asked to develop an RDF representation of RDAFollowing the “London” meeting in April 2007

Stimulated creation of “FRBR namespaces project”To develop RDF representation of FRBR

RDF

Resource Description FrameworkBasis of the Semantic Web

Metadata expressed as “atomic” statementsA simple, single, irreducible statement

The creator of this work is R. Shankar

Constructed in 3 parts“Triple”

RDF triplesThe creator of this work is R. Shankar

Subject of the statement = Subject: This workNature of the statement = Predicate: has creatorValue of the statement = Object: R. Shankar

This work – has creator – R. Shankarsubject – predicate – object

RDF requires the subject and predicate of a triple to have machine-readable identifiersUniform Resource Identifier (URI)Object of triple can be a URI, or a literal string like a

title

RDF properties and classes

A predicate is called a propertyProperties link two things

A specific work with a specific creatorThis work <-> R. Shankar

A generic type of thing is called a classWorks, Persons, Places, etc.

Properties can specify which class the subject and object of a triple should belong toSubject “domain”; object “range”

Methodology (1)Open Metadata Registry used for basic representation

in RDFSame approach as RDAProvides URI assignment; labels, definition, scope note,

property range and domainFR family are entity-relationship models

Entity => RDF ClassE.g. FRBR Work

Entity attribute => RDF propertyE.g. FRBR has-intended-audience

Entity-entity relationship => RDF propertyE.g. FRBR is-realized-through (Work-Expression)

Classes

Properties

FRBR Groups are not (super-)classes [FRBR Review Group]

Group 1 entities are not classes [some ontologists]

4.4.12 Capture mode Capture mode is the means used to record notation, sound, or images in the production of a manifestation (e.g., analogue, acoustic, electric, digital, optical etc.).

3.2.5 Person The fifth entity defined in the model is person: an individual. The entity defined as person encompasses individuals that are deceased as well as those that are living.

Entity => Class

Label

Definition

Scope note

Attribute => Property

Label

Definition

Scope note

Verbalised label

URI

URI for Manifestation

Spanish translation of label- URI remains the same

Methodology (2)Terminology of labels, definitions and scope notes

based as closely as possible on source documentationE.g. Property label = “has” + attribute name

Classes and properties declared for prior model(s) re-used in current modelE.g. FRAD re-uses URIs from FRBR namespace

E.g. FRBR Expression; FRBR has-keyNo re-use of RDF resources from external community

namespaces such as Dublin Core TermsEquivalences likely to be established later

Methodology (3)

FR attribute properties have domain but no rangeRequired by the model for extensibilityE.g. FRBR has-key (domain = Work)

Relationship properties have domain and rangeE.g. FRBR is-realized-through (domain = Work;

range = Expression)

General, non-technical issuesConsistency within documentation

Written for human consumption; evidence of variable phrasing to make it more readableE.g. “prior”, “preceding”, “first”

Consistency of labels of RDF resourcesE.g. “has a reproduction” (regular) vs “has

reproduction” (irregular)Documentation refers to sub-types of entity

E.g. “musical work”, “serial”First pass: sub-type => sub-classBut wrong due to semantic overlap

Opaque URIshttp://iflastandards.info/ns/fr/frbr/frbrer/P1001

frbrer:P1001Not http://iflastandards.info/ns/fr/frbr/frbrer/Work

IFLA operates in a multilingual environmentAnglophone bias avoidedLabels, etc. in English (@en), but no problem in

accommodating translationsAllows subsequent changes to alternative and

preferred labels without causing confusionURI must not change!

Linking the FR models

Relationships between separate FR model classes and properties are declared with RDF equivalence and hierarchical propertiesE.g. owl:sameAs, rdfs:subClassOfE.g. FRAD class Corporate Body seems to be a

sub-class of FRBR Corporate BodyWill inform the consolidated model

Which may also require additional classes and properties

RDA issues

DCMI RDA Task Group has declared parallel FRBR classes within RDA namespaceCould not wait for FRBR RDF resources to be

approvedJSC to decide whether to substitute FRBR namespace

resources, or declare equivalenceConflict with FRBR in RDA implementation

scenarios?RDA Manifestation “embodies” Work and

Expression; FRBR allows only Expression

Legacy catalogue records

Domain and range of FR (and RDA) properties inhibit use for creating triples from non-FRBRized catalogue recordsNeed separate URIs for each specific Work,

Expression, Manifestation, and ItemSolution: equivalent properties with no

domain or rangeNeed just a URI for the specific resource described

RDA has such unbounded properties

Thank yougordon@gordondunsire.com FRBR Review Group

http://www.ifla.org/en/frbr-rg Open Metadata Registry

http://metadataregistry.org/ Library Linked Data Incubator Group

http://www.w3c.org/2005/Incubator/lld/Sponsors

ALACataloging & Classification QuarterlyMARCIVE, Inc.