1. FRSAD Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data in its finalizing stages : a very brief report Päivi Pekkarinen Helsinki University Library Meilahti Campus Library -Terkko IFLA FRSAR Advisory Group Workshop on Conceptual Modelling for Archives, Libraries and Museums, Helsinki, 28-29 January 2010

2. Outline 1. FRSAD: The ”FRBR Family” FRBR-FRAD-FRSAD 2. FRSAR–Working Group Members Terms of reference FRSAD Model 3. FRSAD: some issues

3. 1. FRSAD: The ”FRBR Family” Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records - FRBR Approved by IFLA in 1997 Published in 1998 Conceptual model of the ‘bibliographic universe’ IFLA. (1998). Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records: Final Report. IFLA Study Group on the Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records. München: KG Saur. http://www.ifla.org/publications/functional-requirements-for-bibliographic- records

4. 1. FRSAD: The ”FRBR Family” FRSAD Context and time line IFLA FRBR model1998FRBR Working Group 1992, Review Groups Document: Funtional Requirements for Bibliographic Records, final report 1998 Extension > IFLA-FRAD model 2007FRAD Working Group 1999 Document: Functional Requirements for Authority Data, final report 2009 Extension > IFLA-FRSAD model draft 2009FRSAD Working Group 2005 : Document: Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data, final report targeted for 2010

5. 1. FRSAD: The “FRBR family” framework FRBR: the original framework All entities defined, Focusing on Group 1 entities FRAD: Functional Requirements for Authority Data Focusing on Group 2 entities FRSAD: Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Data Focusing on Group 3 entities

6. 1. FRSAD: The “FRBR family” framework The entities are divided into three groups: conceptualized “bibliographic universe” Group 1 entities are defined as the products of intellectual or artistic endeavours: work, expression, manifestation, and item Group 2 entities are actors, those who are responsible for the intellectual or artistic content, the physical production and dissemination, or the custodianship, of Group 1 entities: person, corporate body Group 3 entities are the subjects of works, intellectual or artistic endeavour

7. 2 FRSAR – Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Records GroupsFRSAR Esbalished 2005 IFLA indexing and classification section Members: Working Group Marcia Lei Zeng, USA, Chair Maja Zumer, Slovenia, Co-Chair Athena Salaba, USA, Co-Chair, Secretary Leda Bultrini, Italy Lois Mai Chan, USA Gerhard Riesthuis, Netherlands Diane Vizine-Goetz, OCLC, USA Ekaterina Zaytseva, Russia

8. 2 FRSAR – Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Records GroupsFRSAR Members: Advisory Group Victoria Francu, Romania Jonathan Furner, USA Hemalata Iyer, USA Dorothy McGarry, USA David Miller, USA Liaison person: ALA SAC Ed, O’Neill, USA Liaison person: OCLC FRBR Päivi Pekkarinen, Finland Magdalena Svanberg, Sweden Barbara Tillett, Library of Congress, USA

9. FRSAR Working Group - Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Records Terms of Reference 1. to build a conceptual model of Group 3 entities within the FRBR framework as they relate to the aboutness of works, 2. to provide a clearly defined, structured frame of reference for relating the data that are recorded in subject authority records to the needs of the users of those records, and 3. to assist in an assessment of the potential for international sharing and use of subject authority data both within the library sector and beyond. http://www.ifla.org/VII/s29/wgfrsar.htm

10. FRASAD’s relation to FRBR

11. FRSAD Terminology Thema: any entity used as a subject of a work Nomen: any sign or sequence of signs (alphanumeric characters, symbols, sound, etc.) by which a thema is known, referred to or addressed as

12. FRASAD Conceptual Model

13. FRSAD model: Work –Thema relationship

14. FRSAD model: Thema – Nomen relationship

15. The importance of the THEMA-NOMEN model for the subject authority data is to separate what are usually called concepts (or topics and subjects) from what they are known by

16. FRSAD and SKOS

17. FRSAD Model: Potential Abstract conceptual model for subject authority data -allowing any thema to be independent of any nomen, including any syntax that a nomen may use; -independent of any implementation, or application, or language system Potential for international sharing and use of subject authority data - matched e.g. to SKOS, OWL Potential for building general and special ontologies

18. 3. FRSAR Working Group – FRSAD Model summary and the future FRSAR Working Group established by the IFLA 2005 Division IV Bibliographic Control and especially the Section of Classification and Indexing Supposed to finish its work 2010. - First FRSAD draft July 2008: Discussed at IFLA Québec, August 2008; - Second FRSAD draft July 2009, world-wide review: Comments discussed at IFLA Milan, August 2009, Two FRSAR WG meetings in Kent, Ohio, autumn 2009 ; - Third FRSAD draft will be released early 2010, Final document targeted to be published prior to IFLA Gothenburg, August 2010.

19. 3. FRSAR Working Group – FRSAD model summary and the future Some Issues: - FRSAD model structure differs from those of FRAD and FRBR: thema considered a superclass including all the entities of the FRBR three groups of the conceptualized”bibliographic universe” - Terminology: Thema – Nomen New FRBR Review Group will be established 2010 to harmonize the three FR models.

20. Aknowledgements This presentation is based on the paper given by Marcia Lei Zeng and Maja Zumer at IFLA Milan 2009 on the work of the FRSAR - Functional Requirements for Subject Authority Records - Working Group: "Introducing FRSAD and Mapping it with SKOS and other models" http://nkos.slis.kent.edu/FRSAR/FRSADZengZumerIFLA09.pdf FRSAD Draft July 2009 http://nkos.slis.kent.edu/FRSAR/report090623.pdf

21. Acknowledgements FRSAR Working Group Chairs Marcia L. Zeng, Kent State University, USA Athena Salaba, Kent State University, USA Maja Zumer, University of Ljubljana, Slovenia FRSAR Working Group and Advisory Group members