Conceptualizations of the Cataloging Object: A Critique on Current Perceptions of FRBR Group 1 Entities

Peponakis, Manolis Conceptualizations of the Cataloging Object: A Critique on Current Perceptions of FRBR Group 1 Entities. Cataloging & Classification Quarterly, 2012, vol. 50, n. 5–7, pp. 587-602. [Journal article (Paginated)]

[thumbnail of Peponakis_FRBR_Group1_Conceptualizations.pdf]
Preview
PDF
Peponakis_FRBR_Group1_Conceptualizations.pdf

Download (257kB) | Preview

English abstract

Libraries face a double challenge in the digital age: both the describing framework and the describing object are under change. FRBR attempts to generate a coherent theory and yield a new Paradigm of cataloging. This study deploys current conceptualizations of the FRBR Group 1 entities within the FRBR models family with a view to semantic interoperability. FRBR cannot be considered as simple metadata describing a specific resource but more like some kind of knowledge related to the resource. This study reveals that there are different perspectives of what is introduced by FRBR as the cataloging object in the context of various interpretations of the model, namely RDA, FRBRization projects and FRBROO.

Item type: Journal article (Paginated)
Keywords: Resource Description, FRBR Group 1 Entities, FRBRization, RDA, FRBRoo, Cataloging Object, Semantic Interoperability
Subjects: I. Information treatment for information services > IA. Cataloging, bibliographic control.
Depositing user: Manolis Peponakis
Date deposited: 28 Aug 2012
Last modified: 02 Oct 2014 12:23
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10760/17461

References

1. W3C, “Library Linked Data Incubator Group Final Report”, (October 2011) http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/lld/XGR-lld-20111025/.

2. All references to IFLA Functional Requirements for Bibliographic Records (FRBR) refer not to the text of the final report (1998) but to the text “as amended and corrected through February 2009”. Available at http://www.ifla.org/files/cataloguing/frbr/frbr_2008.pdf.

3. Paradigm as defined by Kuhn, Thomas (1996) [1962] “The Structure of Scientific Revolutions”. University of Chicago: Chicago and London.

4. Resource Description and Access (RDA). All references to rule number in this article point to the online version of RDA toolkit. Available at http://www.rdatoolkit.org/.

5. Athena Salaba and Yin Zhang, “Functional requirements for bibliographic records: From a conceptual model to application and system development,” Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 33, no. 6 (August 1, 2007): 17-23, http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bult.2007.1720330606/abstract.

6. Richard P. Smiraglia, “Bibliocentrism, Cultural Warrant, and the Ethics of Resource Description: A Case Study,” Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 47, no. 7 (September 2009): 685, http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01639370903112013.

7. Allen H. Renear and Yunseon Choi, “Modeling Our Understanding, Understanding Our Models - The Case of Inheritance in FRBR,” Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 43, no. 1 (2006): 1-16, http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/meet.14504301179.

8. Shoichi Taniguchi, “Conceptual modeling of component parts of bibliographic resources in cataloging,” Journal of Documentation 59, no. 6 (2003): 695, http://www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/00220410310506321.

9. See also FRBR section 3.3 “Aggregate and Component Entities”, p. 29

10. The remaining stories are not included in the figure due to lack of space.

11. Carl F. Cargill, “Why Standardization Efforts Fail,” Journal of Electronic Publishing 14, no. 1 (2011), http://hdl.handle.net/2027/spo.3336451.0014.103.

12. Pisanski, J., and M. Žumer. “Mental models of the bibliographic universe. Part 1: Mental models of descriptions.” Journal of Documentation 66, no. 5 (2010): 645.

13. According to rule 1.5 “A resource may be described in any of the following ways that are applicable and appropriate to the purpose of the description: a) using a comprehensive description, b) using an analytical description, c) using a hierarchical description”.

14. Bemal Rajapatirana and Roxanne Missingham, “The Australian National Bibliographic Database and the Functional Requirements for the Bibliographic Database (FRBR)”, The Australian Library Journal. 14 no 1 (2005): 31-42, http://www.alia.org.au/publishing/alj/54.1/full.text/rajapatirana.missingham.html.

15. Manolis Peponakis, Michalis Sfakakis, and Sarantos Kapidakis, “FRBRization: using UNIMARC link fields to identify Works,” in 77th IFLA General Conference and Assembly (presented at the World Library and Information Congress, San Juan, Puerto Rico, 2011), http://hdl.handle.net/10760/16679.

16. Trond Aalberg and Maja Žumer, “Looking for Entities in Bibliographic Records,” in Digital Libraries: Universal and Ubiquitous Access to Information, ed. George Buchanan, Masood Masoodian, and Sally Jo Cunningham, vol. 5362 (Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2008), 327, http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1484114.

17. Alison Babeu, Building a “FRBR-Inspired” Catalog: The Perseus Digital Library Experience (Perseus Digital Library, January 31, 2008), 17, http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/~ababeu/PerseusFRBRExperiment.pdf.

18. Nuno Freire, José Borbinha, and Pável Calado, “Identification of FRBR Works Within Bibliographic Databases: An Experiment with UNIMARC and Duplicate Detection Techniques,” in Asian Digital Libraries. Looking Back 10 Years and Forging New Frontiers, ed. Dion Hoe-Lian Goh et al., vol. 4822 (Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2007), 267-276, http://www.springerlink.com/content/d06r28v440n1x420/.

19. Trond Aalberg and Maja Žumer, “Looking for Entities in Bibliographic Records,” in Digital Libraries: Universal and Ubiquitous Access to Information, ed. George Buchanan, Masood Masoodian, and Sally Jo Cunningham, vol. 5362 (Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2008), 328, http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1484114.

20. Martha M. Yee, “FRBRization: a Method for Turning Online Public Finding Lists into Online Public Catalogs,” Information Technology and Libraries 24, no. 3 (2005): 81.

21. R. Bennett, B.F. Lavoie, and E.T. O’Neill, “The concept of a work in WorldCat: An application of FRBR,” Library Collections, Acquisition and Technical Services 27, no. 1 (2003): 51.

22. Trond Aalberg, “Navigating in Bibliographic Catalogues,” in Research and Advanced Technology for Digital Libraries, 2002, 238-250, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45747-X_18.

23. Thomas B. Hickey and Edward T. O’Neill, “FRBRizing OCLC’s WorldCat,” Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 39 (April 19, 2005): 240, http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1300/J104v39n03_15.

24. Maja Žumer et al., “Breaking barriers between old practices and new demands: the price of hesitation” (presented at the 77th IFLA General Conference and Assembly, Puerto Rico, 2011), http://conference.ifla.org/sites/default/files/files/papers/ifla77/80-zumer-en.pdf.

25. See “LC RDA CORE ELEMENTS FOR THE US RDA TEST” as revised May 4, 2011. Available at http://www.loc.gov/aba/rda/pdf/rdaprep_core_elements.pdf.

26. This study intentionally does not discuss ad hoc efforts like the one by Indiana University (see Jenn Riley, “Enhancing Interoperability of FRBR-Based Metadata,” International Conference on Dublin Core and Metadata Applications (October 20, 2010): 31-43, http://dcpapers.dublincore.org/index.php/pubs/article/view/1037).

27. Stefan Gradmann, “rdfs:frbr-Towards an Implementation Model for Library Catalogs Using Semantic Web Technology,” Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 39, no. 3 (April 2005): 66, http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1300/J104v39n03_05.

28. Erik Duval et al., “Metadata Principles and Practicalities,” D-Lib Magazine 8, no. 4 (April 2002), http://www.dlib.org/dlib/april02/weibel/04weibel.html.

29. Stefan Gradmann, “rdfs:frbr-Towards an Implementation Model for Library Catalogs Using Semantic Web Technology,” [ibid.]: pp. 63-75, http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1300/J104v39n03_05.

30. D. Hillmann et al., “RDA vocabularies: Process, outcome, use,” D-Lib Magazine 16, no. 1-2 (2010), http://www.dlib.org/dlib/january10/hillmann/01hillmann.html.

31. Naimdjon Takhirov, Trond Aalberg, and Maja Žumer, “An XML-Based Representational Document Format for FRBR,” in Web Information Systems Engineering – WISE 2010 Workshops, ed. Dickson K. W. Chiu et al., vol. 6724 (Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2011), 70-83, http://www.springerlink.com/content/q866264u13530645/.

32. N. Takhirov, F. Duchateau, and T. Aalberg, Linking FRBR entities to LOD through semantic matching, vol. 6966, 2011, http://www.springerlink.com/content/f768870g164g7078/.

33. All references to FRBROO refer to version 1.0.1. Available at http://www.cidoc-crm.org/docs/frbr_oo/frbr_docs/FRBROO_V1.0.1.pdf.

34. Martin Doerr and Patrick LeBoeuf, “Modelling Intellectual Processes: The FRBR - CRM Harmonization,” in Digital Libraries: Research and Development, 2007, 114-123, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-77088-6_11.

35. Gilles Falquet, Claire-Lise Mottaz-Jiang, and Jean-Claude Ziswiler, “Ontology Based Interfaces to Access a Library of Virtual Hyperbooks,” in Research and Advanced Technology for Digital Libraries, ed. Rachel Heery and Liz Lyon, vol. 3232 (Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2004), 99-110, http://www.springerlink.com/content/dd4et3xpx1hjfqcy/.

36. Richard P. Smiraglia, “Bibliocentrism, Cultural Warrant, and the Ethics of Resource Description: A Case Study,” Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 47, no. 7 (September 2009): 671-686, http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01639370903112013.

37. Stefan Gradmann, “rdfs:frbr-Towards an Implementation Model for Library Catalogs Using Semantic Web Technology” [ibid.] p. 64.

38. In order to make the bibliographic records available to web search engines a protocol like Open Archives Initiative (OAI) is sufficient.

39. Richard P. Smiraglia, “The ‘Works’ Phenomenon and Best Selling Books,” Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 44, no. 3-4 (July 2007): 181, http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1300/J104v44n03_02.

40. Patrick Le Boeuf, “FRBR and Further,” Cataloging & Classification Quarterly 32 (December 2001): 29, http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1300/J104v32n04_03.

41. John J. Riemer, “The expansion of cataloging to cover the digital object landscape,” Cataloging and Classification Quarterly 48, no. 6 (2010): 558, http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01639374.2010.496309.


Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item