1. Presented to the ALCTS FRBR Interest Group, ALA Annual, 24 June 2011
Functional requirements for bibliographic linked data: the FR family and the Semantic Web
Gordon Dunsire
Presented to the ALCTS FRBR Interest Group, ALA Annual, 24 June 2011

2. Overview Background Resource Description Framework
Representing Functional Requirements for the Semantic Web
Some issues
Legacy catalogue records

3. FRAD
Does not cover
subjects
FRBR
Does not cover
“authorities” FR
Consolidated
model
FRSAD
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
1998
2009
2010
2012?

4. Background
RDA: resource description and access is based on FRBR and FRAD
Bibliographic metadata content guidelines
DCMI RDA Task Group asked to develop an RDF representation of RDA
Following the “London” meeting in April 2007
Stimulated creation of “FRBR namespaces project”
To develop RDF representation of FRBR

5. RDF Resource Description Framework
Basis of the Semantic Web
Metadata expressed as “atomic” statements
A simple, single, irreducible statement
The creator of this work is R. Shankar
Constructed in 3 parts
“Triple”

6. RDF triples The creator of this work is R. Shankar
Subject of the statement = Subject: This work
Nature of the statement = Predicate: has creator
Value of the statement = Object: R. Shankar
This work – has creator – R. Shankar
subject – predicate – object
RDF requires the subject and predicate of a triple to have machine-readable identifiers
Uniform Resource Identifier (URI)
Object of triple can be a URI, or a literal string like a title

7. RDF properties and classes
A predicate is called a property
Properties link two things
A specific work with a specific creator
This work <-> R. Shankar
A generic type of thing is called a class
Works, Persons, Places, etc.
Properties can specify which class the subject and object of a triple should belong to
Subject “domain”; object “range”

8. Methodology (1)
Open Metadata Registry used for basic representation in RDF
Same approach as RDA
Provides URI assignment; labels, definition, scope note, property range and domain
FR family are entity-relationship models
Entity => RDF Class
E.g. FRBR Work
Entity attribute => RDF property
E.g. FRBR has-intended-audience
Entity-entity relationship => RDF property
E.g. FRBR is-realized-through (Work-Expression)

9. Classes
Properties
FRBR Groups are not (super-)classes [FRBR Review Group]
Group 1 entities are not classes [some ontologists]

10. Attribute => Property
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
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.).
Attribute => Property
Label
Definition
Scope note

11. Verbalised label
URI
URI for Manifestation

12. Spanish translation of label
- URI remains the same

13. Methodology (2)
Terminology of labels, definitions and scope notes based as closely as possible on source documentation
E.g. Property label = “has” + attribute name
Classes and properties declared for prior model(s) re-used in current model
E.g. FRAD re-uses URIs from FRBR namespace
E.g. FRBR Expression; FRBR has-key
No re-use of RDF resources from external community namespaces such as Dublin Core Terms
Equivalences likely to be established later

14. Methodology (3) FR attribute properties have domain but no range
Required by the model for extensibility
E.g. FRBR has-key (domain = Work)
Relationship properties have domain and range
E.g. FRBR is-realized-through (domain = Work; range = Expression)

15. General, non-technical issues
Consistency within documentation
Written for human consumption; evidence of variable phrasing to make it more readable
E.g. “prior”, “preceding”, “first”
Consistency of labels of RDF resources
E.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-class
But wrong due to semantic overlap

16. Opaque URIs http://iflastandards.info/ns/fr/frbr/frbrer/P1001
frbrer:P1001
Not
IFLA operates in a multilingual environment
Anglophone bias avoided
Labels, etc. in English but no problem in accommodating translations
Allows subsequent changes to alternative and preferred labels without causing confusion
URI must not change!

17. Linking the FR models
Relationships between separate FR model classes and properties are declared with RDF equivalence and hierarchical properties
E.g. owl:sameAs, rdfs:subClassOf
E.g. FRAD class Corporate Body seems to be a sub-class of FRBR Corporate Body
Will inform the consolidated model
Which may also require additional classes and properties

18. RDA issues
DCMI RDA Task Group has declared parallel FRBR classes within RDA namespace
Could not wait for FRBR RDF resources to be approved
JSC to decide whether to substitute FRBR namespace resources, or declare equivalence
Conflict with FRBR in RDA implementation scenarios?
RDA Manifestation “embodies” Work and Expression; FRBR allows only Expression

19. Legacy catalogue records
Domain and range of FR (and RDA) properties inhibit use for creating triples from non-FRBRized catalogue records
Need separate URIs for each specific Work, Expression, Manifestation, and Item
Solution: equivalent properties with no domain or range
Need just a URI for the specific resource described
RDA has such unbounded properties

20. Thank you gordon@gordondunsire.com Sponsors
FRBR Review Group
Open Metadata Registry
Library Linked Data Incubator Group
Sponsors
ALA
Cataloging & Classification Quarterly
MARCIVE, Inc.