‘Convergence is the Goal’: Activity Report of the IFLA FRBR/CIDOC CRM Harmonization Group
Conceptual models: museums & libraries towards an object-oriented formulation of FRBR aligned on the...
-
Upload
adela-barker -
Category
Documents
-
view
213 -
download
0
Transcript of Conceptual models: museums & libraries towards an object-oriented formulation of FRBR aligned on the...
Conceptual models: museums & libraries
towards an object-oriented formulation of FRBR aligned on the CIDOC CRM ontology
Maja Žumer (University of Ljubljana) & Patrick Le Bœuf (National Library of France)ELAG 2006 “New tools and new library practices”Bucharest, 26 April 2006
2
FRBR: the conceptual model for libraries
(Quite familiar to ELAGers! Regular workshops 1998-2003) “FRBR” is for “Functional Requirements for Bibliographic
Records” Developed 1991-1997 & published 1998 by IFLA
(International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions)
Maintained by the IFLA FRBR Review Group Covers “bibliographic records” and “headings” for library
materials: “textual, music, cartographic, audio-visual, graphic, three-dimensional materials”
3
Key concepts of FRBR
Expression
Manifestation
Item
Work
Event
Place
Object
Concept
Corporate Body
Person
4
CIDOC CRM: the conceptual model for museums (introduced to ELAGers by Nick Crofts at ELAG 2000) “CRM” is for “Conceptual Reference Model” Developed from 1996 on by ICOM CIDOC (International
Council of Museums – International Committee for Documentation)
Maintained by CRM-SIG (Special Interest Group) About to be validated as ISO 21127 Covers any kind of data (“descriptive” or “authorities”)
created by museums in the fields of fine arts, archaeology, natural history…
5
Key concepts of CIDOC CRM
Event
What happened?
Involving whom?
Involving what?
When? Where?
Actor
ActorAppellation
PhysicalThing
Appellation
Time-Span
TimeAppellation
Place
PlaceAppellation
ConceptualObject
Of what
?Type
6
FRBR/CRM Harmonisation Group
formed 2003gathers representatives for & corresponding
members of: the IFLA FRBR Review Group the CRM Special Interest Group
chaired by Martin Doerr, Institute of Computer Science of the FOundation for Research & Technology Hellas – ICS-FORTH (assisted by Patrick Le Bœuf)
7
To what purpose harmonise FRBR & CIDOC CRM? To reach a common view of cultural heritage information
(because we share users and types of materials) To check FRBR’s internal consistency To enable interoperability and integration (mediation tools,
Semantic Web applications…) For FRBR’s and CIDOC CRM’s mutual benefit (to extend
the scope of both) Also, differing (but compatible) views:
Maja: to help design better rules to create new records and make better catalogues in the future
Patrick: to extract the semantic meaning of existing records in ontology-driven applications
8
Methodology
6 meetings so far Detailed reports not yet publicly available What we do at those meetings:
‘translate’ FRBR entities and attributes into an OO model which borrows as much as possible from CIDOC CRM and sometimes also gives back to CIDOC CRM
Some principles: Take a user (or use)-centered approach! Too many attributes? Then the entity is not a primitive concept
but a complex elaboration Split the entity! A given attribute actually refers to an event? (e.g., “date”)
Make the event explicit!
9
Consequences of FRBR/CRM harmonisation
Re-examination of entities (work, expression, manifestation)
Review of attributes
10
Work
FRBR: intellectual or artistic creationcommon content of expressions
FRBRoo:Individual work, Complex work, Publisher
work, Container workModeling of creation process
11
Expression
Clear in FRBR after the new definition
FRBRoo: ExpressionFragment
12
“Dual nature” of manifestation in FRBR
A single physical exemplar: physical object“In some cases there may be only a single physical exemplar
produced of that manifestation of the work (an author’s manuscript, a tape recorded for an oral history archive, an original oil painting, etc.)”
Multiple copies for public dissemination or distribution: an abstract notion
Formal production process Limited number of copies for private study or preservation
“Whether the scope of production is broad or limited, the SET of copies produced in each case constitutes a manifestation.”
13
Proposal
Those two ‘types’ of manifestation are not equal, so we propose two distinct entities:
Manifestation singletonManifestation product type
They are different by nature and have different attributes, different relationships
14
Attributes in FRBRDerived from analysis of data typically reflected in bibliographic
recordsThe principal sources: ISBDs Guidelines for Authority and Reference Entries (GARE) Guidelines for Subject Authority and Reference Entries (GSARE) UNIMARC Manual
“Comprehensive but not exhaustive”
“Attributes defined at logical level (as viewed by a user, rather than specific data elements defined by catalogers):
Individual data elements Aggregate of discrete data elements (e.g. title of manifestation)”
15
QuestionsAttributes were defined from existing
cataloguing practice and mapped to user functions later.
Are some attributes missing? Shouldn’t attributes be defined from the
analysis of functions and entities? Are electronic resources appropriately
dealt with?
16
Proposal
A review of attributesBased on user functions and specific
needs within functionsInclude electronic resources
In principle agreed within FRBR Review Group
17
What next? Group 2, Group 3, FRAR and FRSAR attributes FRBR, FRAR & FRSAR relationships Review the overall picture (some attributes were
postponed, some new concepts need clarification) Check the robustness Draft deliverables: scope notes and examples for
each class & property, tutorials, explanatory documents…
Prepare a prototype application = 2 years of work??
18
A quote from my favourite book
Here is Edward Bear, coming downstairs now, bump, bump, bump, on the back of his head, behind Christopher Robin. It is, as far as he knows, the only way of coming downstairs, but sometimes he feels that there really is another way, if only he could stop bumping for a moment and think of it. And then he feels that perhaps there isn’t... (A.A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner)
19
So:
Let us think...
...and find another way: FRBR