Samvera Community Wiki
MODS and RDF Call 2016-11-14
Time: 9am PDT / Noon EDT
Call-In Info: 712-775-7035 (Access Code: 960009)
Homework Reminder:
Moderator: @sanderson (Boston Public Library)
Primary Notetaker: @Eben English (etherpad link: https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/RDF-MODS-20161114)
Attendees:
@sanderson (BPL)
@Eben English (BPL)
Jennifer Liss (Indiana)
@soriordan (Emory)
@Melanie Wacker (Columbia)
@Eric O'Hanlon (Columbia)
@ksgerrity (Amherst College)
@saverkamp (NYPL)
@Sara Rubinow (NYPL)
@Johanna Radding (Amherst College)
Agenda:
Conversion Code Update
No updates yet; waiting on final mappings of several elements
series, subseries, collection, institution Individual Institution Usage And RDF Conversion discussion
Review of institutional mappings
BPL
Still looking for alternatives to bf:seriesStatement, which it seems like is being used incorrectly (more for commercial series than archival series)
Would be open to using opaquenamespace predicate for archival series
using bf:partOf for collection, but would be open to using dcterms:isPartOf instead
Columbia
No updates from last meeting.
Using dcterms:isPartOf for collection
Archives Hub may have some info on handling series?
RDA has "is subseries of" predicate (http://www.rdaregistry.info/Elements/u/#P60192), could be used for commercial series?
For commercial series numbering, both RDA and Bibframe have predicates to handle this.
Indiana
dcterms:relation for archival series
does not accept literal as range, would need to use dc:relation for literal values
dcterms:isPartOf for collection
not using subseries (or haven't found example yet)
Amherst
No use of series or subseries
using dcterms:isPartOf for collection (will mint URIs for collections)
Bibframe for commercial series: bf:seriesStatement, bf:seriesEnumeration, bf:hasSeries
Bibframe documentation is confusing regarding series – MARC mapping doesn't work well with item-level records for concept of archival series
NYPL: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CcYUi0o3MErlltiUjbPF6HqRQcL0i80G9Xn7hjgYIv0/edit?usp=sharing
PCDM
could we use this (pcdm:isMemberOf) for both series and collection?
would use the type of the object being associated (collection, series) to determine nature of relationship
this would be less helpful in a metadata-sharing environment
Further investigation needed
bf:seriesOf, bf:subseriesOf – these may be usable, but further research needed
Existing examples of Bibframe in the wild?
Next steps
Steven will come up with a collaboration document describing 2 different options for further discussion:
generic-predicate-with-typed-objects
series-specific-predicates
part, extension, and recordInfo collaboration document review
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/103__DdqlTPMXFsANLtEhQpRUbphnL3oeQoOcPygF2GU/edit?usp=sharing
No comments or corrections
We can remove mapping for <mods:part> (Indiana had only example of this, they are OK removing it since it is very institution-specific).
Next meeting: Monday November 28th at 9:00 AM PST / Noon EST
Homework: go back through collaboration documents, find unresolved issues