Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

RDA FTW or WTF LITA LOD SIG ALA AC 2014. RDA For The Win or What The Fheck 2014-06-29ALA Annual 2014 LITA/ALCTS LOD SIG2.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "RDA FTW or WTF LITA LOD SIG ALA AC 2014. RDA For The Win or What The Fheck 2014-06-29ALA Annual 2014 LITA/ALCTS LOD SIG2."— Presentation transcript:

1 RDA FTW or WTF LITA LOD SIG ALA AC 2014

2 RDA For The Win or What The Fheck ALA Annual 2014 LITA/ALCTS LOD SIG2

3 Perspective (Mine)...and everything I say is arguable ALA Annual 2014 LITA/ALCTS LOD SIG3

4 A very brief history of bibliographic metadata standards CHAOS …(passage of time)… AACR3 CHAOS (LOD) RDA Bibex (schema.org) BibFrame ALA Annual 2014 LITA/ALCTS LOD SIG4

5 RDF vs. XML (yet again) XMLish (bound) data is – Concrete, finite, closed, constrained by Schema XML Schema, JSON Schema, RelaxNG, SQL, et al) – Good for creation, storage RDF (unbound) data is – Flexible, infinite, open, constrained by Logic – Good for distribution, aggregation – VERY likely to be globally invalid (illogical) ALA Annual 2014 LITA/ALCTS LOD SIG5

6 A brief word or 3 about RDF Data model assumes an ‘Open World’ Any ‘body’ can ‘say’ any Thing about any Thing Knowledge has no boundary – There is no ‘record’ Every Thing that is ‘said’ is ‘true’ – Until it’s ‘inconsistent’ …because it’s all about POV ALA Annual 2014 LITA/ALCTS LOD SIG6

7 Anglo-American vs. (everyone else) Software Developers are used to English everything “That ship has sailed” -- Richard Wallis (English speaker) Semantics aren’t consistent, even across English-speaking cultures – Semantics (meanings) matter in bib metadata ALA Annual 2014 LITA/ALCTS LOD SIG7

8 Anglo-American vs. (everyone else) Cataloging by/for French (or Chinese) speakers may require different semantics Global metadata, especially LOD, requires cross-cultural Linking – This requires cross-cultural mapping (not crosswalks) of often dissimilar semantics ALA Annual 2014 LITA/ALCTS LOD SIG8

9 MARC 21 vs. (everything else) Both semantics and syntax – Semantics has centuries of accumulated value – Syntax is too limited for LOD – Syntax uses opaque identifiers Doesn't play well with FRBR – Not even a little bit – doesn’t deal with abstractions ALA Annual 2014 LITA/ALCTS LOD SIG9

10 RDA Data Model RDA instructions are for people Explicitly multilingual, multicultural – Intense, cross-cultural semantic commitment – Semantics and labels continuously adjusted for cross-cultural uniformity Explicitly based on FRBR and DCAM – Wait... DCAM? ALA Annual 2014 LITA/ALCTS LOD SIG10

11 RDA RDF 'Opaque' identifiers – – No ontological commitment – Multicultural – Supports RDA's commitment to cross-cultural semantic alignment ALA Annual 2014 LITA/ALCTS LOD SIG11

12 RDA RDF Lexical Aliases – – Language-specific identifiers (URIs) – 'Readable' by humans in each language – Convey minimal semantics (Bad but whadareyagonnado?) – Always 'resolve', for the machines, to the canonical opaque identifier...and resolve historical aliases ALA Annual 2014 LITA/ALCTS LOD SIG12

13 RDA RDF Unconstrained Properties – – Implies no membership in a set (class) of the Thing Being Described – Required for cross-domain mapping see bf:Work, schema:CreativeWork, isbd:Resource – Supersets of the constrained properties ALA Annual 2014 LITA/ALCTS LOD SIG13

14 A brief word about Semantic Mapping vs. Crosswalks Semantic mapping – Preserves original data context – Assigns meaning to the mapping relationship – This is what the Unconstrained facilitate Crosswalk – 1:1 relationship – always ‘same as’ – Discards original data context ALA Annual 2014 LITA/ALCTS LOD SIG14

15 RDA & GIT Uses git for versioning Uses GitHub for – Distribution https://github.com/RDARegistry/RDA-Vocabularies – Documentation (GitHub pages) – Issue tracking https://github.com/RDARegistry/RDA-Vocabularies/issues – Release tracking https://github.com/RDARegistry/RDA-Vocabularies/releases ALA Annual 2014 LITA/ALCTS LOD SIG15

16 rdaregistry.info & git Nginx server Hosts the data in ‘resolvable’ form Content negotiation for all RDF ‘flavors’ Gets updated from GitHub ‘code’ pulled from GitHub Master branch Always updated to match current release Eventually able to request specific release ALA Annual 2014 LITA/ALCTS LOD SIG16

17 rdaregistry.info & the OMR Open Metadata Registry – rs%5Bagent_id%5D=177&filter=filter rs%5Bagent_id%5D=177&filter=filter Editorial interface Generates RDF – Uses API from Maintains a local git repository Pushes results to GitHub ALA Annual 2014 LITA/ALCTS LOD SIG17

18 Soo… What’s the answer? (does FRBR matter?) At this point in our program Jon becomes a typical talking head… ALA Annual 2014 LITA/ALCTS LOD SIG18

19 BibFrame isn’t the ‘answer’ Discards MARC 21 semantics Redefines existing properties Redefines frbr:work ‘Borrows’ semantics from RDA without reference Discards FRBR semantics Unique approach to frbr:work Proprietary approach to MARC 21 mapping ALA Annual 2014 LITA/ALCTS LOD SIG19

20 Schema.org bib extensions (Bibex) isn’t the ‘answer’ Oriented toward global search engines Redefines frbr:work Hard (not impossible) to extend Constrained by limitations of HTML-based container ALA Annual 2014 LITA/ALCTS LOD SIG20

21 Schema.org bib extensions (Bibex) isn't the 'answer’ Hard to map Hard to translate What are the instructions? ‘Unique’ approach to frbr:work Proprietary approach to MARC 21 mapping ALA Annual 2014 LITA/ALCTS LOD SIG21

22 RDA isn’t the ‘answer’ Lots of cruft from AACR2 and MARC 21 Minimal community involvement in development of the data model Strong commitment to FRBR ALA Annual 2014 LITA/ALCTS LOD SIG22

23 MARC21 isn’t the ‘answer’ Semantics tied to syntax Field:indicator:subfield ‘means’ some Thing – See – 11,078 Things can be said in current 0xx-7xx Hard to extend Can’t be globally extended without local pain ALA Annual 2014 LITA/ALCTS LOD SIG23

24 POV For decades we’ve shared a single POV: MARC LOD forces the consideration of multiple POV ALA Annual 2014 LITA/ALCTS LOD SIG24

25 So what’s the answer? ALA Annual 2014 LITA/ALCTS LOD SIG25

26 Harvest globally MARC 21+RDA+BibFrame+Bibex+... The global (open) web of data is full of: Known knowns Known unknowns Unknown knowns Unknown unknowns – We can exploit that… be flexible – The Robustness principle ALA Annual 2014 LITA/ALCTS LOD SIG26

27 Process Locally Aggregate – To integrate and surface inconsistencies ‘Validate’ – according to local knowledge Map – To apply your knowledge to the unknown Cherry-pick – To create variable ‘boundaries’ ALA Annual 2014 LITA/ALCTS LOD SIG27

28 Publish Globally MARC 21+RDA+BibFrame+Bibex+… With consistency and precision Make your data ‘knowable’ The Robustness principle ALA Annual 2014 LITA/ALCTS LOD SIG28

29 Controversy “… Where there is conflict, let me sow harmony, Where there is doubt, let me sow faith, Where there is despair, let me sow hope, Where there is darkness, let me sow light, …” ALA Annual 2014 LITA/ALCTS LOD SIG29

30 Cheers! Aka ALA Annual 2014 LITA/ALCTS LOD SIG30


Download ppt "RDA FTW or WTF LITA LOD SIG ALA AC 2014. RDA For The Win or What The Fheck 2014-06-29ALA Annual 2014 LITA/ALCTS LOD SIG2."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google