commonplace.net: Local library data in the new global framework

Über­le­gun­gen zu den Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRB) von Lukas Koster/Amsterdam:

All these events focus mainly on publis­hing library biblio­gra­phic meta­data as lin­ked open data. Personally I am not con­vin­ced that this is the most inte­res­ting type of data that libra­ries can pro­vide. Bibliographic meta­data as such describe publi­ca­ti­ons, in the broa­dest sense, pro­vi­ding infor­ma­tion about title, aut­hors, sub­jects, edi­ti­ons, dates, urls, but also phy­si­cal attri­bu­tes like dimen­si­ons, num­ber of pages, for­mats, etc. This type of infor­ma­tion, in FRBR terms: Work, Expression and Manifestation meta­data, is typi­cally shared among a large num­ber of libra­ries, publis­hers, book­sel­lers, etc. ‘Shared’ in this case means ‘mul­ti­plied and redun­dantly stored in many dif­fe­rent local sys­tems‘. It doesn’t really make sense if all libra­ries in the world publish iden­ti­cal meta­data side by side, does it?

In essence only really uni­que data is worth publis­hing. You link to the rest. …

Siehe den gan­zen Beitrag unter:

• http://commonplace.net/2012/01/local-library-data-in-the-new-global-framework/

Zu den FRBR:

• http://www.ifla.org/en/publications/functional-requirements-for-bibliographic-records