Some of you may be interested in this recent update on BIBFRAME, the Library of Congress Bibliographic Framework Initiative.
- Beacher J.E. Wiggins, director for Acquisitions and Bibliographic Access at the Library of Congress
- Sally Hart McCallum, chief of the Network Development and MARC Standards Office at the Library of Congress
- Reinhold Heuvelmann, the German National Library
- Jackie Shieh, George Washington University Libraries
- Eric Miller, president of Zepheira
If you don’t have time to listen to all four speakers I would draw your attention in particular to Eric Miller‘s part of the talk entitled, “An Introduction to BIBFRAME Profiles and Supporting Editors,” which starts at about 40:45.
Organizations have been invited to register BIBFRAME implementations and participate in the BIBFRAME testbed.
In last week’s announcement the Library of Congress said the following:
These are two separate initiatives that will be important for implementation testing in 2014. However, it is expected that there will be significant overlap: Testbed organizations are encouraged to register their implementations, and those who register their implementations are encouraged to participate in the Testbed.
They’ve also developed a “core vocabulary” to support BIBFRAME implementations which contains “the RDF properties, classes, and relationships between and among them.” More information is available on the vocabulary site which includes three vocabulary views derived from the master RDF file: Model View; Category View; and List View.
This has been posted to a number of email lists so I imagine you’ve seen this already. I’m posting it here too so the information can be quickly accessed if needed.
The Library of Congress is pleased to release – for dissemination, sharing, and feedback – the initial plan for its Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative.
The plan is available at:
Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Website
Bibliographic Framework Transition Initiative Listserv
Working Group on the Future of Bibliographic Control Website
This “statement” was issued by Deanna B. Marcum, Associate Librarian for Library Services at the Library of Congress in mid-May so not so new news but certainly something to take note of. The Library of Congress recognizes that “technological and environmental changes are … causing the library community to rethink the future of bibliographic control, including the MARC 21 communication formats.”
The profession is wrestling with many alternative views of the future and Deanna B. Marcum is leading an initiative at the Library of Congress to “analyze the present and future environment, identify the components of the framework to support our users, and plan for the evolution from our present framework to the future—not just for the Library of Congress, but for all institutions that depend on bibliographic data shared by the Library and its partners.” A very ambitious agenda in which they promise to involve community stakeholders through various discussions and meetings over the next two or three years.
Apparently a number of the participants in the RDA test group commented that despite the current budgetary issues many consider it “necessary to replace MARC 21 in order to reap the full benefit of new and emerging content standards.” Again not new news, Roy Tennant and others have been calling for the death of MARC for some time now.
One of the issues listed in this statement includes experimentation with Semantic Web and linked data technologies and it will be very interesting to see if this will become a primary focus with the profession as the bibliographic environment evolves into the future.
This looks like a useful set of documents recently released by the UK group Research Information Network (RIN): Creating Catalogues: Bibliographic Records in a Networked World.
“… a very timely overview of the whole process of bibliographic record production for printed and electronic books, and for scholarly journals and journal articles. This report follows the production of these data from publisher through a range of intermediaries to the end user. Whilst there are pressures to make these data more freely available, each player in the process has its own motivations and business models in creating, adding to, using or re-using bibliographic data, all of which need to be considered.“
The following are available for download:
The New England Technical Services Librarians association held their annual spring conference last week. The conference was called, “Working the Cataloging Landscape: Fishing, Mining and Harvesting‘.
Looks like a great collection of presentations:
More information and presentation abstracts available at the conference website.
Here’s a provocative presentation on RDA by Heidi Lee Hoerman delivered September 28, 2008 at the OLAC/MOUG/NOTSL Conference. Flogging dead horses seems to be the main theme. She has also included a quote from this post on Bill Denton’s blog.
Diane Hillman spoke about the future of bibliographic control at the American Association of Law Libraries conference in Portland, Oregon last week. Her talk, ‘After the Report: Reactions to On The Record‘ focused on five main areas:
- Increase the efficiency of bibliographic production
- Transfer effort into higher-value activity
- Position our technology for the future
- Position our community for the future
- Strengthen the library profession
Some interesting comments included:
-silo of library bibliographic control; libraries are not the only players
-need to look beyond LC and OCLC for leadership
-no longer need to agree on one approach in order to move forward
-move to providing primary materials in context rather than focus on secondary material
-more reliance on machine application vs. human intervention; without this we will not be able to participate; not predicting the future but making the future
-MARC has more past than future
Deanna B. Marcum, Associate Librarian for Library Services at the Library of Congress, has announced the release of, “Response to On the Record: Report of the Library of Congress Working Group on the Future of Bibliographic Control“. This is a point-by-point look at the WoGroFuBiCo Report with a “rationale and a brief summary of current and planned actions.”
“… the Library of Congress accepts and endorses the recommendations of the Working Group on the Future of Bibliographic Control. We are eager to work with colleagues nationally and internationally to achieve the vision that is so compellingly drawn in On the Record. This response is not an official program statement from the Library of Congress, nor is it an implementation plan. It is an endorsement of the concepts proposed by the Working Group and the Library’s current thinking about actions that can be taken immediately.”
Deanna Marcum forwarded a letter to introduce the joint statement posted to AutoCAT last Thursday of the Library of Congress, the National Library of Medicine, and the National Agricultural Library. In her letter she asked that, “… you bear in mind that it is the entire bibliographic system that needs to be considered and reworked, and the cataloging code is only one small piece of the work that lies ahead.”
The joint statement supports continued work on RDA; this is the concluding paragraph from the joint statement:
“The collective resolve is to complete the development of RDA, to conduct appropriate tests that will inform and involve the broader U.S. library community as to the utility of the code, and to ensure a product that is useful, usable, and cost effective. The Library of Congress will continue to work with its international colleagues on the Joint Steering Committee for Development of RDA and the Committee of Principals and keep them apprised of the evaluation progress and outcomes as the three national libraries, representing their constituents, undertake the tests outlined above.”
Discussion continues on the AutoCAT list.