Upload
diane-i-hillmann
View
796
Download
2
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Presentation for the LITA/ALCTS MARC Transition Interest Group, ALA Midwinter, Seattle, January 2013. Abstract: Many of those who seek to map or crosswalk data from MARC to other schemas believe that the elderly MARCXML is the only option. However, another option exists, in a more modern package: http://marc21rdf.info. These 'level zero' elements allow MARC21 data to be represented without loss in RDF; subsequently, semantic mappings can be used to interoperate the data with other linked data based on Dublin Core, ISBD, RDA, etc. This resource is open to use by anyone, and will be available in the mapping service beingbuilt by the Open Metadata Registry (http://metadataregistry.org).
Citation preview
Lossless MARC Mapping ALA Midwinter Seattle 2013 MARC Formats Transition IG
Diane Hillmann
Is MARC Dead?
• The communication format is very dead (based on standards no longer updated)
• The semantics are not dead o They represent the distillation of decades of
descriptive experience o As we move into a more machine-assisted world, our
old concerns about the size of our legacy can be addressed
o Taking the legacy records with us should be based on solutions developed using open and transparent strategies
‘Lossy’ vs. ‘Lossless’ MARC Mapping
• ‘Lossy’ means that some information gets lost in transition o Loss can also occur intentionally, e.g. when pre-
selection of preferred elements is made
• Current mapping strategies are based on o One-time, inflexible, programmatic methods that
effectively hide the process from consumers § This practice makes it difficult for community
members to effectively respond to decisions made behind the curtain or to contribute to better maps
A Better Strategy
• The decision to set up the MARC21rdf data was to provide the possibility of transparent mapping by data providers at many levels
• This strategy is based on mapping all of MARC – not a selection o Filtering accomplished by data consumers, who know
best what they need o Meeting the potential for widespread use of data
mapped from MARC depends on putting data out without assuming we know what other people need
Libraries as Data Publishers
• Data from library ‘publishers’ should look like an American supermarket—lots of choices, with decisions made by consumers o Right now we seem to be operating as Soviet
bakeries (“we don’t care what you want, we know what you need”) § This stifles innovation and continues to treat
libraries as passive consumers § This is not what open linked data is supposed to
be doing for us
A Resource, WorldCat http://www.worldcat.org/title/linked-data-evolving-the-web-into-a-global-data-space/oclc/704257552
A Resource, MARC21 https://catalog.library.cornell.edu/
marc21rdf.info http://marc21rdf.info/elements/2XX/M260__a
marc21rdf.info http://marc21rdf.info/elements/2XX/M260__a
Definition: Place of publication and any additions to the name of a place, including an address...
tag: 260 (Publication, Distribution, etc. (Imprint) ) ind1: # (Not applicable or No information provided or Earliest available publisher) ind2: # (no caption) sub: a (Place of publication, distribution, etc.)
Search for Place of Publication (1) http://metadataregistry.org/schemaprop/search?sq=Place+of+Publication&commit=Search+Element+Sets
Search for Place of Publication (2) http://metadataregistry.org/schemaprop/search?sq=Place+of+Publication&commit=Search+Element+Sets
RDA Place of Publication (Manifestation) http://rdvocab.info/Elements/placeOfPublicationManifestation
RDA Place of Publication http://rdvocab.info/Elements/placeOfPublication
FRBRer Place of Publication http://iflastandards.info/ns/fr/frbr/frbrer/P3057
ISBD has Place of Publication... http://iflastandards.info/ns/isbd/elements/P1016
How Does this Strategy Fit?
• Mapping as a service o Maps continually updated o Openly available o Easily distributable
• Publishing & Consuming systems o Need to work in tandem to enhance and improve data o The methods to do this are not new, but are not well
understood in traditional libraries (to some extent because of their continuing emphasis on ‘records’)
M21 Level 0
RDF map of “audience” attribute
ex:Resource - m21:M008MU22 - m21t:commonaud#j
My Resource (has) Target audience of Music “juvenile”
My Work (has) Intended audience “juvenile”
My Resource (has) Target audience “juvenile”
RDA
Level 0
MARC 21
My Creative work (has) audience “juvenile” Schema.org
My Resource (has) audience “juvenile” Dublin Core
ISBD My Resource has note on use or audience “juvenile”
M 21 triple
Let the machine to do the work
The Place of Publication http://goo.gl/maps/FaHJ
Questions?
Diane Hillmann [email protected] Metadata Management Associates http://managemetadata.com